jF  Ph//V^ 


BV  600  .D7  1920 

^^ 

Drake,  Durant,  1878-1933. 

Shall  we  stand  by  the 

church? 

SHALL  WE  STAND  BY 
THE  CHURCH  ? 

A  DISPASSIONATE  INQUIRY 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

NKW  YORK    •    BOSTON  •   CHICAGO  •   DALLAS 
ATLANTA  •    SAN   FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Limited 

LONDON  •  BOMBAY  •  CALCDTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OF  CANADA,  Ltd. 

TORONTO 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY 
THE  CHURCH? 

A   DISPASSIONATE  INQUIRY 


DURANT  DRAKE 

A.M.  (Harvard),  Ph.D.  (Columbia) 

Professor  of  Philosophy  at  Vassar  Collegre 

Member  of  the  Council  and  of  the  Advisory  Committee 

of  the  Religious  Education  Association 

Author  of  "Problems  of  Conduct,"  "Problems  of  Religion."  etc. 


iQeto  gorfe 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
1920 

All  rights  reserved 


COPYEIGHT,  1920, 

By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 


Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published,  November,  1920 


TO  MY  FELLOW-MEMBERS 
OF  THE 

RELIGIOUS    EDUCATION    ASSOCIATION 

FEARLESS  IN  CRITICISM  BUT  STRONG  IN  FAITH 
THEY  ARE  STANDING  BY  THE  CHURCH 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

The  following  chapters  have  been  given  as  lectures 
at  various  conferences  and  conventions.  Most  of 
them  have  been  published  in  periodicals;  my  thanks 
for  permission  to  reprint  are  due  to  the  publishers  of 
The  Hihhert  Journal^  The  American  Journal  of  The- 
ology ^  The  International  Journal  of  Ethics,  The  Bib- 
lical World,  The  Eomiletic  Review,  The  Journal  of 
Philosophy^  Psychology,  and  Scientific  Methods,  Re- 
ligious Education;  to  the  American  Unitarian  Asso- 
ciation, which  published  one  of  the  chapters  in  pam- 
phlet form ;  and  to  the  American  Sociological  Society, 
which  published  another  chapter  in  its  volume  of  pro- 
ceedings for  1919. 

The  essays  gathered  from  these  quarters  have  a 
unity  of  viewpoint  and  argument,  which  is  the  result 
of  a  long  and  earnest  study  of  the  potentialities  and 
shortcomings  of  the  churches,  and,  in  particular,  in 
recent  years,  an  interest  in  the  constructive  work  of 
the  Religious  Education  Association.  Suggestions 
and  criticisms  have  come  from  sources  too  numerous 
to  mention,  but  in  particular  from  colleagues  and 
pupils  at  the  University  of  Illinois,  Wesleyan  Univer- 
sity, and  Vassar  College.  Many  letters  received 
from  readers  of  my  "  Problems  of  Religion ''  have 
urged  the  formulation  of  such  an  argument  as  this; 
and  indeed  it  may  be  considered  as  a  sort  of  practical 
postscript  to  that  volume. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I  Introduction:  The  Present  Crisis      .     .     .       1 

II    Do  We  Need  the  Church? 8 

III  The  Christian  Gospel 19 

IV  Christianizing  Church  Members  ....     31 
V  Christianizing  the  Community     ....     43 

VI    Encouraging  Free  Thought 62 

VII  Sharpening  the  Church's  Thinking  ...     76 

VIII  What  Have  We  that  is  Certain  ?  .     .     .     .88 

IX    Evolution  in  Religion 98 

X  What  Religious  Education  Might  Be      .     .  109 

XI  Shall  Churches  Have  Creeds?       ....  125 

XII  Shall  We  Unite  the  Churches?  ....  142 

XIII  Is  Missionary  Enterprise  Desirable?       .     .  153 

XIV  Shall  We  Stand  by  the  Church  ?  .     .     .     .  168 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH  ? 

CHAPTER  ONE 

introduction:  the  present  crisis 

The  epoch  that  has  begun  with  the  termination  of 
the  Great  War  is  to  be  a  period  of  reconstruction. 
Industrial,  political,  international  institutions  are 
being  scrutinized,  and  subjected  to  a  criticism  more 
searching  than  ever  before.  Education,  art,  litera- 
ture, marriage,  the  press,  the  courts  —  there  is  loose 
in  the  world  the  spirit  that  would  prove  all  things, 
in  order  to  hold  fast  only  to  that  which  is  good.  It  is 
clear  that  the  Church  cannot  escape  its  pitiless  search- 
light. 

Indeed,  we  must  face  the  fact  that  many  critics  — 
and  by  no  means  merely  the  temperamental  scoffers, 
the  worldly  minded,  and  the  disgruntled  —  have  al- 
ready returned  their  verdict  that  the  Church  is,  on 
the  whole,  a  menace  to  our  society,  or  at  least  a  futile 
and  hopeless  cumberer  of  the  ground.  A  consider- 
able hostility  to  the  Church  has  arisen  among  the 
masses,  and  among  the  "  intellectuals  " ;  there  is  wide- 
spread sneering  at  its  pretensions  and  impatience  at 
its  lack  of  leadership  in  the  moral  crisis  of  the  age. 
Furthermore,  many  of  the  gentlest  of  our  people, 
many  of  our  most  useful  citizens,  remain  outside 
its  ministrations,  in  spite  of  continued  efforts  to  bring 
them  into  the  fold.     There  are  some  fifty  million  peo- 


2  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

pie  in  the  United  States  —  about  half  the  population 
—  who  are  not  identified  with  any  church.  The  an- 
nual increase  in  membership  is  far  less  than  it  used  to 
be;  and  in  1919  there  is  said  to  have  been  actually  a 
slight  decrease.  Attendance  at  service  has  fallen  off, 
in  proportion  to  the  population,  more  rapidly  than 
membership.  These  signs  point  at  least  to  a  wide- 
spread dissatisfaction,  and  presumably  to  some  fault 
in  an  institution  which,  like  all  others,  exists  to  meet 
and  satisfy  a  human  need. 

To  aid  in  a  clearer  apprehension  of  this  crisis  in  the 
life  of  the  Church,  it  will  be  useful  to  cite  a  few  rep- 
resentative statements  chosen  almost  at  random 
from  contemporary  utterances  unfavorable  to  its 
claims. 

Professor  J.  S.  Schapiro,  writing  in  the  Atlantic 
Monthly  for  June,  1920,  declares  that  "  the  intel- 
lectual .  .  .  does  not  pay  the  church  the  compliment 
of  being  hostile  to  her  ...  he  simply  ignores  it  as  a 
force  incapable  of  good  or  evil.'^ 

Another  writer,  in  the  August,  1920,  number  of  this 
same  periodical  (by  no  means  a  radical  or  anti-clerical 
publication ! ) ,  in  picturing  the  attitude  of  contempo- 
raries to  the  Church,  makes  one  speaker  say,  "  The  day 
was,  when  the  ^  world '  was  full  of  darkness  and  the 
Church  full  of  light,  but  now  the  ^  world  '  has  a  clearer 
moral  vision  than  the  Church."  Another  speaker  says, 
"  To  tell  you  the  truth,  I  don't  think  I  ever  met  a  man 
before  who  cared  what  a  parson  says." 

The  historian,  in  H.  B.  Mitchell's  Talks  on  Reli- 
gion,  puts  it  thus :  "  One  rarely  treats  a  pulpit  utter- 
ance seriously  in  these  days.  You  take  it  as  part  of 
the  ceremony,  part  of  w^hat  is  expected,  and  so  without 
significance,  like  the  formal  inanities  of  social  inter- 
course. ...  It  would  seem  to  me  that  the  pulpit 


INTRODUCTION:     THE  PRESENT  CRISIS  3 

would  be  the  last  place  in  the  world  from  which  to 
start  a  genuine  reform,  and  that  the  Church  must  be 
more  of  a  hindrance  than  a  help." 

Mr.  H.  G.  Wells,  in  God,  the  Invisible  King,  wrote : 
"  The  history  of  Christianity,  with  its  encrustation 
and  suffocation  in  dogmas  and  usages,  its  dire  perse- 
cutions of  the  faithful  by  the  unfaithful,  its  desicca- 
tion and  its  unlovely  decay,  its  invasion  by  robes  and 
rites  and  all  the  tricks  and  vices  of  the  Pharisees 
whom  Christ  detested  and  denounced,  is  full  of  warn- 
ing against  the  dangers  of  a  Church.''  And  in  his 
Italy,  Frayice  and  Britain  at  War  he  surveyed  the 
situation  in  these  lands  and  reached  this  conclusion : 
^'  What  I  conceive  to  be  the  reality  of  the  religious 
revival  is  to  be  found  in  quarters  remote  from  the  re- 
ligious professionals." 

Bernard  Shaw  is  more  specific  in  his  criticism: 
u  rpj^^  religious  bodies  .  .  .  are  a  sort  of  auxiliary 
police,  taking  off  the  insurrectionary  edge  of  poverty 
with  coals  and  blankets,  bread  and  treacle,  and  sooth- 
ing and  cheering  the  victims  with  hopes  of  immense 
and  inexpensive  happiness  in  another  world  when  the 
process  of  working  them  to  death  in  the  service  of  the 
rich  is  complete  in  this."  {Preface  to  Major  Bar- 
bara. ) 

The  Communist  Party  in  the  United  States  makes 
a  similar  indictment,  in  its  official  platform,  de- 
nouncing the  Church  as  an  institution  that  "  be- 
fuddles the  minds  of  the  masses  and  defends  the 
capitalistic  order."  Similar  criticisms  are  found 
passim  in  the  literature  of  all  the  radical  political 
groups,  and  barely  escaped  being  incorporated  into 
the  platform  of  the  Socialist  Party  in  the  spring  of 
1920. 

A  writer  in  the  New  Repuhlic  recently  declared 


4  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

that  "  there  are  already  large  numbers  of  people  to 
whom  the  ecclesiastical  system  is  a  vexation  and  an 
offense."  He  speaks  in  particular  of  "  its  economic 
inefficiency,  its  aimlessness  of  programme,  the  hosts 
of  agents  employed  in  inconsequential  effort,  its  ver- 
itable army  of  retainers  riding  on  the  government- 
administered  thoroughfares  at  half  the  tariff  rates 
paid  by  the  people,  its  enormous  accumulations  of 
wealth  invested  in  massive  structures  standing  often 
absolutely  unused  for  any  purpose  during  all  but 
three  or  four  hours  in  the  week."  And  —  to  close 
this  list  of  indictments  —  a  valuable  book  lately  pub- 
lished by  Henry  Sturt,  called  The  Idea  of  a  Free 
Church  J  begins  its  opening  chapter  as  follows :  "  The 
task  which  the  present  book  proposes  is  to  suggest 
a  religion  and  a  church  more  satisfactory  than 
the  Christian.  It  is  inspired  by  the  conviction  that 
our  established  religion  is  now  utterly  insufficient  to 
satisfy  a  thoughtful  mind,  and,  that  all  progress, 
moral  and  intellectual,  demands  that  Christianity 
should  be  given  up  and  replaced  by  something 
better." 

Some  of  these  critics  condemn  not  only  the  Church 
but  Christianity.  However,  they  quite  universally 
mean  by  Christianity  the  religion  as  it  is  commonly 
taught  by  the  churches  and  practised  by  church-going 
people.  If  we  are  to  accept  the  point  of  view  of  the 
author  of  The  Religion  of  Christ  in  the  Twentieth 
Century,  and  admit  that,  by  and  large,  the  religion 
of  Christ  has  never  really  been  tried  (Bernard  Shaw 
has  repeated  this  asseveration  in  the  preface  to  An- 
drocles  and  the  Lion),  we  must  apply  their  stric- 
tures not  to  the  founder  of  the  religion  but  to  the  in- 
stitution that,  if  their  criticisms  are  well  founded, 
misrepresents    his    spirit    and    teaching.     Moreover, 


INTRODUCTION:     THE  PRESENT  CRISIS  5 

not  only  are  most  of  the  keenest  critics  of  the  Church 
reverent  in  their  attitude  toward  Jesus,  but  many  of 
them  are  staunch  supporters  of  the  Church,  which,  by 
candid  criticism,  they  hope  to  awaken  to  her  faults  and 
her  unused  opportunities.  Indeed,  many  of  the  truest 
Christians  are  most  dissatisfied  with  the  Church.  To 
quote  a  writer  in  Harper's  Magazine  for  August,  1920, 
"  To-day  there  are  perhaps  more  seekers  for  spiritual 
things  outside  the  Church  than  in  it.  What  is  more 
startling  is  this :  There  are  perhaps  as  many  normal 
Christians  outside  the  Church  as  in  it.'^  In  short,  to 
be  a  Christian  is  not  of  necessity  to  approve  the 
Church ;  nor  is  a  loyalty  to  her  incompatible  with  the 
liveliest  appreciation  of  her  mistakes. 

It  is  high  time,  then,  that  the  churches  took  more 
seriously  the  defection  of  so  many  whose  fathers  and 
mothers  stood  in  their  ranks;  that  church  people 
listened  in  a  humbler  spirit  to  the  moralists  and 
public-spirited  citizens,  and  even  to  the  half -inarticu- 
late murmurs  of  the  alienated  classes,  who  find  the 
Church  futile  or  positively  harmful  in  her  influence. 
Where  there  is  so  much  smoke  there  must  be  some 
fire ;  where  so  many,  of  different  walks  and  different 
interests,  condemn,  or  quietly  pass  by  on  the  other 
side,  there  must  be  something  —  probably  a  number 
of  things  —  wrong.  Instead  of  remaining  obsti- 
nately sure  of  herself,  and  condemning  those  who  flout 
her  or  plead  with  her  or  ignore  her,  the  Church 
should  be  willing  to  profit  by  criticism,  study  the 
times,  and  seek  to  adjust  her  ideals  and  her  program 
to  the  needs  of  the  people  to  whom  she  exists  to 
minister. 

The  plant  of  the  churches  in  the  United  States  repre- 
sents an  investment  of  billions  of  dollars.  Their  up- 
keep costs  perhaps  four  hundred  million  dollars  a  year. 


6  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

Approximately  a  quarter  of  a  million  men  are  kept 
from  other  productive  work  to  be  their  ministers  and 
priests.  Probably  a  million  other  men  and  women 
give  of  their  time  and  energy  for  their  service.  Surely 
the  public  has  a  right  to  scrutinize  this  expenditure  of 
money  and  productive  power.  What  does  it  accom- 
plish? Is  the  accomplishment  commensurate  with 
the  expenditure?  Could  more  efficient  results  be  at- 
tained by  any  reform  in  aims  or  methods?  Is  there 
some  result  that  we  could  reasonably  expect  from  this 
great  institution  that  is  not  being  adequately  attained? 
More  insistently  than  ever  these  questions  are  bound 
to  be  asked  during  the  coming  years ;  churchmen  them- 
selves must  ask  them,  and  seek  in  a  spirit  of  genuine 
humility  and  open-mindedness  for  the  answers. 

Many  books  are  written  in  defence  of  the  Church. 
A  few  are  written  to  attack  her.  And  many  who  do 
not  care  to  undertake  that  ungracious  task  give  oral 
expression  to  their  impatience  or  sadness  or  disgust. 
The  purpose  of  this  little  volume  is  neither  to  at- 
tack nor  to  defend,  but  to  examine  impartially,  as  be- 
fits a  lifelong  student  of  philosophy,  and  to  seek,  if 
it  may  be  found,  a  way  to  avoid  the  pitfalls  into 
which  the  churches  have  so  often  fallen,  a  way  that 
shall  lead  straighter  to  the  goal  upon  which  the 
churches,  with  all  their  sins,  have  more  or  less 
steadily  kept  their  eyes. 

The  Christian  Church  —  what  part  is  it  to  play  in 
the  civilization  of  the  future?  Only  the  future  can 
tell.  There  is  much  in  its  past  record  that  needs 
forgiveness;  there  is  much  in  its  present  attitude 
(taking  "  the  Church  "  to  mean  a  composite  photo- 
graph of  the  many  existing  churches)  that  arouses 
legitimate  vexation.  But  there  is  much,  very  much, 
in  its  record  in  which  to  glory,  and  limitless  potenti- 


INTRODUCTION:     THE  PRESENT  CRISIS  7 

alities  before  it.  The  time  ahead  of  us  is  a  critical 
period.  If  the  churches  are  content  to  jog  along  in 
the  ruts  of  a  past  generation,  they  will  become  more 
and  more  the  refuge  of  superstition,  the  support  of 
reaction,  and  a  source  of  mere  selfish  personal  conso- 
lation to  their  members.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they 
frankly  welcome  the  vivifying  breath  of  the  new  winds 
that  are  astir  in  the  world,  if  they  listen  to  the  voices 
that  are  summoning  them  to  their  high  calling,  they 
may  again  be  a  mighty  force  for  righteousness  in  the 
land,  and  have  a  future  even  greater  than  their  past. 


CHAPTER  TWO 

DO   WE  NEED   THE   CHURCH? 

Before  taking  up  for  examination  the  various 
criticisms  which  are  currently  made  of  the  Church, 
we  should  raise  the  prior  question,  Do  we  need  the 
Church  at  all?  Is  it  a  necessary  institution,  like  the 
school?  Just  what  does  it  exist  for,  what  is  the 
good  of  it? 

The  traditional  answer  is  that  the  Church  exists 
to  save  souls.  This  phrase  has  an  antique  flavor 
about  it  that  is  repugnant  to  many  to-day;  and  no 
wonder,  in  view  of  the  smug  sacramentalism,  the 
orgiastic  revivalism,  and  the  self-seeking  individual- 
ism that  it  so  readily  connotes.  But  if  the  phrase 
be  interpreted  in  the  spirit  of  modern  psychology, 
it  may  well  serve  as  a  label  for  one  aspect,  and  that 
perhaps  the  most  important,  of  the  work  of  the 
Church.  The  prime  function  of  any  church  is  to 
save  each  individual  whom  it  can  reach,  if  by  any 
means  it  can  save  him,  from  the  pitfalls  of  life,  from 
his  blindness  and  weakness,  from  the  many  dangerous 
influences  that  play  upon  him,  from  all  sorts  of  false 
ideals  and  distorted  conceptions  of  value. 

But  playing  safe  is,  after  all,  a  poor  ideal  for  a 
man  or  woman  of  spirit.  Why  not  put  the  mission 
of  the  Church  in  more  positive  terms?  The  Church 
exists  to  show  men  how  to  live,  and  to  furnish  them 
the  dynamic.  There  is  a  Way  that  saves,  a  solution 
for  the  baffling  problem  of  human  life;  a  Way  that 

8 


DO  WE  NEED  THE  CHURCH?  9 

gives  life  meaning,  worth,  scope,  the  highest  useful- 
ness, freedom  and  power.  The  Church  exists  to  hold 
up  to  men  that  ideal,  that  vision,  to  mould  the  undi- 
rected, or  misdirected,  energies  of  men,  to  actualize 
their  dormant  potentialities  of  good,  to  stir  in  them  a 
best  which  they  might  not  otherwise  have  known  was 
in  them.  It  exists  to  rouse  men  continually  out  of 
their  torpor,  to  keep  alive  in  them  the  sense  of  the  im- 
portance of  common  duties,  and  make  them  care  to 
keep  true. 

Now  this  is  not  all  that  the  Church  exists  to  do. 
But  surely  this  is  enough,  if  the  Church  can  do  it 
with  any  measurable  success,  to  justify  its  existence. 
The  one  thing  above  all  else  that  will  save  this  nation 
and  the  world  is  that  men  shall  be  trained  to  have  a 
conscience  and  an  unselfish  intent.  No  other  wide- 
spread institution  exists  to  this  end.  It  is,  at  least 
in  our  western  civilization,  the  prime  duty  and 
privilege  of  the  Christian  Church  to  undertake  this 
supreme  task. 

There  is,  however,  we  must  be  clear-sighted  and 
candid  enough  to  admit,  a  great  blunder  that  has 
beset  this  task  of  spiritualization,  and  done  much 
to  negative  the  value  of  the  Church.  That  is  the 
error  of  letting  men  suppose  that  salvation  can  be 
effected  by  some  magical  rite  or  ceremony,  or  mere 
profession  of  belief ;  and  that  once  salvation  is  effected 
they  can  congratulate  themselves  and  feel  safe.  This 
expectation  of  miracle,  and  complacency  of  status, 
we  must  vigorously  combat.  Salvation  is  not  so 
lightly  attained,  or  retained.  It  implies  an  attain- 
ment of  character,  a  purification  of  the  will,  which 
normally  requires  earnest  effort  and  long  persever- 
ance in  well-doing ;  and  though  it  be  true  that  it  is  the 
power  of  God  that  saves,  we  must  remember  that  God 


10  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

helps  those  who  help  themselves  —  or  rather,  God 
helps  men  through  their  helping  themselves. 

Moreover,  salvation,  observably,  is  a  matter  of 
degree.  No  one  is  enough  saved.  The  traditional 
dichotomy  —  sheep  on  one  side  of  the  fence,  goats  on 
the  other  —  is  unreal ;  it  is  not  only  inconsonant  with 
the  spirit  of  democracy  and  fair  play,  it  is  hopelessly 
out  of  touch  with  psychology,  or,  for  that  matter,  with 
everyday  observation.  There  is  no  privileged  caste 
of  the  elect.  No  one  can  tell  when  his  feet  may  lead 
him  into  the  paths  of  sin.  However  safe  from  stum- 
bling we  may  feel  ourselves,  we  must  not  slacken  our 
effort ;  eternal  vigilance  is  the  price  of  salvation. 

We  cannot,  then,  too  bluntly  say  that  there  is  no 
intrmsic  value  in  baptism,  in  joining  the  Church  and 
partaking  of  its  communion,  in  confessing  Christ, 
saying  one's  prayers,  or  attending  services.  These 
are  but  so  many  means  to  the  end  of  cleansing  and 
strengthening  the  will,  and  valuable  only  if  and  in 
so  far  as  they  actually  serve  that  end.  It  is  of  no  use 
for  a  church  to  point  to  the  number  of  its  communi- 
cants, or  to  a  large  attendance  at  worship ;  the  only 
ultimate  test  of  its  success  is  —  what  kind  of  people 
is  it  making  out  of  these?  Many  who  perform  these 
rites  and  ceremonies  are  not  thereby  saved,  either 
from  making  a  sorry  mess  of  their  own  lives  or  from 
helping  to  'make  a  mess  of  our  corporate  life.  Hence 
we  must  beware  of  all  things  most,  the  substitution 
of  unction  in  churchmanship  for  unselfishness  and 
purity  of  conduct  in  the  week-day  life.  The  task  of 
the  Church  is  not  to  get  memhers,  it  is  to  Christianize 
them.  And  except  as  it  succeeds  in  actually  making 
them  live  in  the  Christian  Way,  it  has  failed  in  its 
job. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  much  to  be  doubted  if 


DO  WE  NEED  THE  CHURCH?  11 

any  of  the  means  above  referred  to  are  sufficient  for 
the  actual  Christianizing  of  most  people.  Most  peo- 
ple never  have  been  Christianized.  We  must,  there- 
fore, begin  our  detailed  criticism  of  the  work  of  the 
Church  by  considering  what  means  are  available  for 
what  we  have  variously  called  the  saving,  the 
Christianizing,  or  the  spiritual  inspiration  and  guid- 
ance of  men.  But  before  taking  up  that  chief  aspect 
of  the  Church's  task,  let  us  complete  our  preliminary 
conspectus  of  the  functions  of  the  Church. 

If  we  call  what  we  have  been  discussing  the  Spirit- 
ualizing Function  of  the  Church,  we  may  say  that  it 
has  also,  in  practice,  an  Educational  Function.  The 
Church  exists,  we  are  told,  to  teach  men  the  truth 
about  religion  and  kindred  matters.  This  is,  no 
doubt,  a  less  important  function  of  the  Church  than 
in  the  day  before  we  had  so  many  books  and  periodi- 
cals, the  day  when  the  minister  was  almost  the  only 
educated  man  in  the  community,  and  the  Church,  for 
the  mass  of  people,  almost  the  sole  educational  insti- 
tution. But  even  now  the  schools  are  not  free  to 
teach  along  these  lines,  and  there  are  many  who  read 
little.  For  millions,  the  Church  is  the  chief  source 
of  ideas  on  the  ultimate  problems  of  human  life. 

The  Church  must  certainly  beware  of  supposing 
that  correct  theological  beliefs  are  anything  like  as 
important  as  right  conduct.  However  interesting 
and  absorbing  are  the  questions  concerning  the  origin 
and  governance  of  the  universe,  the  nature  of  God, 
the  person  of  Christ,  or  the  destiny  of  the  human 
soul,  these  matters  are  not,  after  all,  of  prime  practi- 
cal importance.  One  can  be  as  good  a  Christian 
without  so  much  as  giving  them  a  thought ;  they  have 
no  actual  bearing  upon  the  question,  What  is  the 
best  way  to  live?     What  is  more,  too  much  emphasis 


12  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

upon  them  tends  to  crowd  out  the  main  thing,  which 
is  to  Hve  aright.  Convictions  we  must,  indeed,  have ; 
light,  intelligence,  insight,  as  well  as  inspiration. 
But  the  important  convictions  are  convictions  about 
what  we  ought  to  do.  We  can  safely  let  the  universe 
run  itself  and  concern  ourselves  with  running  prop- 
erly our  own  little  lives.  So  when  we  speak  of  the 
educational  function  of  the  Church  we  should  have  in 
mind  primarily  her  work  in  spreading  insight  into 
the  true  values  in  human  life. 

The  danger,  however,  lies  not  merely  in  diverting 
interest  from  moral-spiritual  valuations  to  historical- 
cosmological  theories,  but  in  teaching  these  theories 
as  if  they  were  unquestionable  verities.  The  old  no- 
tion that  we  have  a  sure,  revealed  deposit  of  truth, 
of  which  the  Church  is  the  custodian,  must  be  defi- 
nitely abandoned.  Doctrines  are  merely  some  one's 
personal  opinions,  handed  down  to  us,  and  accepted 
by  the  majority  in  a  church.  They  are  only  theories, 
conjectures,  attempts  to  express  and  explain  what  has 
largely  lain  beyond  men's  comprehension.  The 
teaching  of  theology  should,  therefore,  be  not  propa- 
ganda, not  indoctrination,  but  study,  discussion,  a 
tentative,  humble,  seeking  after  truth. 

Here  we  touch  upon  what  is  perhaps  the  Church's 
greatest  sin  —  the  sin  of  encouraging  the  closed  mind 
instead  of  urging  open-mind edness  and  the  critical 
spirit.  Men  have  been  asked  to  believe  thus  and  so 
simply  because  such  was  the  inherited  teaching  of 
the  Church.  This  is  putting  shackles  on  the  mind. 
In  so  far  as  the  Church  has  encouraged  people  to 
give  their  assent,  without  searching  inquiry,  to  doc- 
trines whose  truth  is  sincerely  questioned  by  any 
considerable  number  of  intelligent  men,  she  has  done 
a  grave  disservice  to  our  democracy.     But  not  only 


DO  WE  NEED  THE  CHURCH?  13 

has  she  taught  questionable  opinions  as  certain,  she 
has  attempted  to  inoculate  her  members  with  such 
an  assurance  with  regard  to  them  that  they  shall  be 
immune  to  opposing  arguments.  By  emotional  in- 
fluences she  has  stifled  the  murmurings  of  the  intel- 
lect. The  result  is  that  the  whole  course  of  modern 
thought  has  been  confused,  and  few,  if  any,  modern 
philosophers  have  attained  to  the  intellectual  clarity 
of  the  Greeks.  The  fact  that  a  man  belongs  to  a 
church  is  widely  taken  to  show  that  he  has  an  un- 
critical mind. 

To  ''  teach  the  truth  "  is,  in  short,  too  presumptuous 
a  phrase.  The  Church  must  get  a  humbler  concep- 
tion of  her  mission,  and  be  content  to  try,  by  open 
discussion  and  scholarly  study,  to  lead  men  gradually 
nearer  and  nearer  to  the  truth.  With  this  revision 
of  her  claims,  the  educational  function  of  the  Church 
may  be  said  to  be  valuable  and  important. 

There  remains  to  be  emphasized  what  we  may  call 
the  Social  Function  of  the  Church.  Christianity  is, 
above  everything  else,  the  religion  of  service.  This 
concern  for  one's  own  soul,  that  has  flgured  so  much 
in  ecclesiastical  discussion,  is,  after  all,  but  a  sub- 
limated form  of  self-seeking.  The  true  Christian  is 
concerned  not  so  much  with  saving  himself  as  with 
saving  the  world.  It  is  far  more  Christian  an  ac- 
tivity to  be  opposing  political  graft  or  the  inhumane 
treatment  of  employees,  to  be  standing  hard  against 
the  spirit  of  greed  in  business,  the  spirit  of  violence 
and  lawlessness,  or  the  wanton  luxury  of  the  rich, 
to  be  seeking  to  root  out  wrongs  and  improve  social 
relationships,  than  to  be  repeating  the  Apostles' 
Creed  or  singing  hymns. 

The  social  work  of  the  Church  must  not,  of  course, 
displace  its  inspirational  and  educational  work.     It 


14  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

must  not  degenerate  into  a  mere  giving  of  good  times 
to  people.  But  certainly  the  commandment  to  love 
your  neighbor  as  yourself  demands  that  the  Church 
be  a  center  for  every  sort  of  needed  service.  Should 
it  not,  indeed,  be  the  greatest  of  all  forces  making  for 
that  regenerated  social  order  wherein  God's  will  is 
to  be  fully  expressed,  which  it  has  steadily  looked 
forward  to  under  the  name  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  on 
earth? 

To  sum  up,  then,  the  Church  should  be  a  great 
educational  institution,  giving  the  great  mass  of  com- 
mon people  insight,  as  it  can  find  it,  into  the  meaning 
and  mystery  of  life,  and  a  clear  apprehension  of  their 
real  needs  and  duties.  It  should  patiently,  week  by 
week,  train  its  members  in  the  performance  of  these 
duties.  It  should  be  a  center  for  friendship  and  hu- 
man sympathy,  a  means  of  ministry  to  the  commu- 
nity, a  standing  rebuke  to  the  sins  of  the  world,  and  a 
lever  for  attack  upon  all  forms  of  sin  and  wrong. 

The  critics  of  the  Church  say  that  these  tasks  are 
not  being  adequately  performed;  that  the  Church  is 
hugging  to  itself  an  antiquated  mass  of  superstition, 
is  lost  in  the  performance  of  mere  rites  and  ceremon- 
ies, is  not  making  a  great,  sustained  effort  to  realize 
the  Christian  ideal  either  in  the  more  personal  or  in 
the  more  widely  social  relationships  of  life.  But 
certainly  the  emphasis  has  shifted  in  recent  years. 
Religions  tend  to  pass  through  three  stages  —  from 
an  emphasis  upon  cult  to  an  emphasis  upon  belief,  and 
thence,  finally,  to  an  emphasis  upon  conduct.  So  at 
least  it  is  with  our  Church.  Her  traditional  rites 
and  ceremonies  have  their  value  as  symbols,  clothing 
the  simple  aspirations  and  duties  of  the  Christian 
life  with  solemnity,  and  giving  them  historical  back- 
ground.    Her  creeds  are  stepping-stones  on  the  long 


DO  WE  NEED  THE  CHURCH?  15 

road  to  truth.  But  the  criterion  of  her  usefulness  is 
more  and  more  coming  to  be  recognized  as  the  degree 
in  which  she  permeates  with  Christian  idealism  the 
personal  and  social  life  of  the  world  about  her. 

To  be  sure,  we  might  approve  this  aim,  but  think 
other  means  adequate,  and  perhaps  better,  for  its 
attainment.  There  are  many  roads  outside  the 
Church  that  lead  toward  this  same  goal.  A  man  may 
cultivate  his  religious  life  by  reading  inspirational 
books,  by  solitar}^  prayer  and  meditation,  by  well- 
chosen  friendships,  or  by  other  ad  hoc  organizations. 
These  methods  offer  the  great  advantage  that  the 
man  can  choose  what  best  helps  him,  instead  of  being 
obliged  to  listen  to  pulpit-utterances  that  perhaps 
bore  and  perhaps  annoy  him;  he  can  pick  his  own 
time  for  spiritual  converse,  instead  of  following  the 
clock. 

But  the  first  question  to  ask  is,  Will  he  really  do 
these  things?  Here  and  there  a  man,  or  a  woman, 
will.  Such  a  one  can  perhaps  get  on  well  enough 
without  the  Church.  But  few  there  are  who,  in  the 
rush  of  affairs,  in  the  midst  of  the  seductive  richness 
of  modern  life,  will  attend,  of  their  own  volition, 
regularly  and  at  sufficient  length  to  the  needs  of  the 
spirit.  How  many  people  who  do  not  go  to  church 
make  a  practice  of  reading  religious  books,  or  of  daily 
prayer?  Cultivating  spirituality  takes  time ;  and  un- 
less regular,  definite  hours  are  reserved  for  it,  the 
chances  are  almost  overwhelming  that  presently  no 
time  at  all  will  be  given.  Religion  easily  becomes 
choked  and  crowded  out  of  the  heart,  like  Darwin's 
love  of  poetry.  That  preacher  had  a  true  insight, 
though  an  uncertain  command  of  metaphor,  who 
prayed,  "  If  there  is  a  spark  of  religion  in  any  half- 
believing  heart,  Avater  it,  O  Lord,  water  it." 


16  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

Moreover,  there  are  few  people  who  can  find  the 
springs  of  spirituality  when  b}^  themselves.  For 
most  men  there  is  inspiration  in  numbers ;  they  need 
to  feel  themselves  part  of  a  great  movement.  The 
crowd-impulse  is  a  tremendous  dynamic,  as  we  see  in 
the  case  of  patriotism,  or,  in  an  evil  way,  in  the  case 
of  lynchings;  it  should  be  utilized  to  the  full  for  re- 
ligion. Even  if  a  man  is  unconscious  of  this  social 
influence  bearing  upon  him,  it  is  there;  and  if  the 
churches  should  disappear,  the  most  solitary  saint 
would  feel  the  loss. 

Then,  quite  apart  from  the  abstract  argument, 
there  is  the  fact  that  the  Church  actually  has  a 
tremendous  hold  upon  masses  of  people.  Far  the 
larger  part  of  the  aspiration  and  upward-pushing 
forces  of  the  western  world  for  the  last  nineteen  hun- 
dred years  have  been  enrolled  under  her  banner. 
This  historic  continuity,  this  roll-call  of  heroes  and 
martyrs,  gives  background  and  atmosphere  to  our 
spiritual  life  — "  an  hereditary  foundation  of  revered 
memories,  ideas,  habits,  sentiments,  associations, 
deep-rooted  in  the  heart."  Just  as  an  artist  turns  to 
the  Old  Masters  for  inspiration,  we  need  to  turn  to 
the  great  masters  of  the  spiritual  life.  And,  obvi- 
ously, for  effective  social  ministry,  there  must  be 
organization. 

For  many  of  those  who  go  gladly  to  church  it  is, 
indeed,  more  for  the  social  pleasure  than  for  any 
serious  purpose.  One  meets  there  one's  friends,  there 
are  warm  hand-clasps,  there  is  music,  and  rest ;  it  is  a 
welcome  break  in  the  week's  routine.  But  even  for 
those  who  go  in  this  spirit  there  is  a  chance  that  they 
will  catch  some  higher  spirit  from  those  who  come 
there  to  seek  and  express  it.  Most  people  who  have 
discovered  in  themselves  spiritual  aspirations  have 


DO  WE  NEED  THE  CHURCH?  17 

caught  them  at  some  church-service  somewhere. 
And  for  those  who  have  found  springs  elsewhere, 
there  are  few  but  can  profit  also  from  the  fellowship 
of  the  Church.  The  Church  is  the  great  force  that 
brings  men  together  in  common  aspiration  and  com- 
mon service.  There  at  least  they  need  not  be  shame- 
faced to  talk  of  spiritual  things;  there  they  can  feel 
that  others  are  caring  for  them  too  and  endeavoring 
to  put  them  into  practice.  A  man  should  come  out  of 
her  hallowed  precincts  with  his  own  resolves  re- 
doubled and  his  weakness  put  to  shame  from  the  sight 
of  the  earnestness  and  consecration  of  others. 

There  are  many,  probably,  who  w^ould  never  have 
dreamed  of  the  possibility  of  a  better  life  had  the 
Church  not  summoned  them  to  it  with  her  patient  in- 
sistence; there  are  surely  many  more  who  would  be- 
come too  distracted  by  the  pressure  of  practical  af- 
fairs, or  by  the  lure  of  the  immediate  and  the 
j)leasurable,  to  realize  outwardly  their  private 
dreams,  were  it  not  for  her  continual  reminders. 
There  are  hidden  reservoirs  of  power,  latent  aspira- 
tions and  possibilities,  in  most  of  us  that  are  never 
discovered  or  drawn  upon ;  no  man  but  is  a  potential 
hero  if  you  can  touch  the  right  spring  in  his  nature; 
and  even  the  criminal  would  have  done  some  splendid 
service  if  his  interest  had  been  early  turned  in  the 
right  direction  and  his  energies  rightly  guided. 

Men  are  suggestible  creatures ;  they  are  the  prey  of 
a  thousand  influences  that  stream  from  the  people 
they  meet,  the  newspapers  they  read,  the  words  they 
hear.  The  Church  at  its  best  is  a  powerful  source 
of  suggestion  drawing  them  toward  the  highest 
things.  The  w^ords  of  the  preacher,  who  has  given 
his  life  to  the  study  of  the  human  heart  and  its  needs, 
bringing  to  his  hearers  well-w^orn  ideas,  perhaps,  but 


18  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

put  in  new  ways  and  applied  to  current  problems, 
the  joining  in  prayer  and  song  —  the  whole  atmos- 
phere of  the  Church  is  a  strong  counterweight  to  the 
many  downward-dragging  influences  of  their  daily 
environment. 

If  this  is  so,  is  there  not  strong  reason  in  it  for 
believing  that  when  a  man  thinks  he  does  not  need  the 
influence  of  some  church,  that  man  is  wrapped  in 
the  cloak  of  his  own  conceit?  Honest  he  may  be,  of 
the  strictest  integrity,  and  actuated  by  the  most  un- 
selfish motives;  but  is  it  not  likely  that  there  are 
depths  in  his  nature  that  he  has  never  sounded,  secret 
faults  that  he  does  not  know?  If  he  can  walk  so 
well  unaided,  how  much  more  could  he  not  attain 
when  moved  by  the  faith  and  enthusiasm  of  others! 
This  is  not  to  say  that  he  could  find  the  help  he 
needs  in  any  actual  church  within  his  reach.  But 
it  is  to  say  that  a  church,  some  church,  to  do  what 
we  have  indicated,  is  a  necessary  and  important  part 
of  the  social  structure.  It  is  conceivable  that  the 
Christian  Church  should  disappear;  but  if  so,  some- 
thing will  arise  to  take  its  place.  Whatever  we  may 
call  it,  there  will  always  be  a  need  of  some  organiza- 
tion to  do  for  men  w^hat  the  Christian  Church,  blun- 
deringly and  more  or  less  blindly,  but  still  often  with 
great  effectiveness,  has  done. 


CHAPTER  THREE 

THE    CHRISTIAN   GOSPEL 

The  essential  point  that  the  Church  mnst  never 
forget  is  that  Christianity  "  saves  "  men  not  just  by 
being  accepted,  or  believed,  but  by  being  lived.  Ac- 
ceptance, faith  — these  are  but  preliminary  steps, 
which  may  remain  abortive.  The  task  of  the  Church 
may  well  begin  by  inducing  men  to  acquiesce  in  the 
truth  of  Christianity,  enroll  themselves  as  members 
of  her  organization,  and  partake  of  her  sacraments. 
But  this  is  merely  her  opportunity,  and  theirs.  The 
real  task  of  the  Church  is  to  train  her  members  to  he 
Christian,  in  their  everyday  conduct,  and  to  go  forth 
and  Christianize  the  world. 

Thus,  before  we  examine  the  methods  by  which  the 
Church  can  Christianize  her  members,  and  the  world, 
we  must  understand  clearly  what  it  is  to  be  a  Chris- 
tian. What  is  this  Way  of  life  that  ''  saves  "  men  — 
that,  as  we  put  it,  gives  life  meaning,  worth,  scope 
for  latent  energies,  the  highest  usefulness,  freedom, 
and  power?  To  attempt  a  restatement  of  the  essence 
of  Christianity  within  the  compass  of  a  few  pages 
may  seem  a  needless  repetition  of  familiar  truths. 
But  after  all,  the  heart  of  the  matter  is  just  here;  the 

fundamental  source  of  the  failure  of  the  churches 

in  so  far  as  they  have  failed  —  lies  in  their  distorted 
and  inadequate  conception  of  the  Gospel  that  they 
exist  to  preach. 

Christianity  is  too  big  a  thing  for  any  man,  or  for 

19 


20  SHALL  WE  STInD  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

any  sect,  to  define  satisfactorily  in  phrase  or  creed. 
It  is  a  vast  tidal  force,  a  sweeping  flame  of  regenera- 
tion, a  great  movement  in  the  spiritual  history  of 
man.  Focusing  about  the  personality  and  teaching 
of  Jesus,  it  drew  into  its  synthesis  all  that  was  best  in 
the  religious  life  of  Jewish  and  Gentile  world,  and 
became  the  community  of  men  of  good  will,  the 
crystallization  of  their  faith  in  man's  future,  the  army 
of  those  who  were  willing  to  work  and  pray  for  that 
future  in  a  world  of  selfishness,  sensuality,  discord 
and  despair.  The  churches  have  done  it  an  ill  serv- 
ice by  penning  it  up  in  their  strait-laced  creeds ;  it  is 
more  than  the  creeds  —  and  less.  It  is  a  living  thing, 
to  be  found  in  the  hearts  of  the  faithful;  it  has  out- 
grown a  thousand  formulations  and  will  outgrow  a 
thousand  more.  The  fundamental  trouble  with  the 
church-creeds  is  that,  in  perpetuating  this  or  that 
man's  conception  of  historic  facts  and  cosmic  rela- 
tionships, they  fail  to  express  what  the  religion  es- 
sentially is.  It  is,  essentially,  a  new  intent  in  men's 
hearts,  a  new  attitude  toward  life,  a  new  direction 
given  to  the  will. 

The  fact  is  that  (as  the  doctrine  of  Original  Sin 
rather  one-sidedly  affirms)  the  human  animal  is,  by 
instinct,  a  pretty  selfish  and  sensual  creature;  if  un- 
guided  and  uninspired  by  some  outer  influence  his 
life  would  be  bickering,  brutish,  and  brief.  Moraliz- 
ing influences  of  all  sorts  have,  of  course,  impinged 
upon  him  since  long  before  the  dawn  of  recorded  his- 
tory. But  of  all  these  regenerative  forces,  the  move- 
ment known  as  Christianity  has  been  most  efficacious. 
Into  a  world  which  is  never  free  from  the  necessity 
of  struggling  with  the  lure  of  the  senses,  with  the 
inertia  of  the  will,  with  demoralization  and  despair, 
a  world  which  was  then  at  one  of  its  lowest  ebbs  of 


THE  CHRISTIAN  GOSPEL  21 

corruption  and  vice,  the  gospel  of  Christ  came  with  a 
light  of  surpassing  wisdom  and  beauty.  A  great 
wave  of  spiritual  fervor  swept  over  the  western 
world.  Whether  or  not  this  turn  of  the  tide  was  an 
inevitable  reaction,  and,  if  so,  what  forms  it  might 
have  assumed  under  a  different  set  of  historic  cir- 
cumstances, need  not  concern  us.  Suffice  it  to  say 
that  the  greater  part  of  the  moral  idealism  of  Europe 
since  that  day,  and  of  all  the  lands  where  European 
influence  has  become  dominant,  has  enrolled  itself 
under  the  banner  of  the  prophet  of  Nazareth. 

The  outstanding  features  of  this  spiritual  move- 
ment, as  one  looks  to  its  origin  and  to  its  persistence 
during  nineteen  centuries  of  varying  world-view,  are 
its  faith,  its  militancy,  and  its  assertion  of  human 
brotherhood.  It  is  an  optimistic  religion,  a  crusad- 
ing religion,  a  religion  of  universal  love.  It  is  not 
easy  to  keep  these  motives  from  interfering  with  one 
another:  the  faith  readily  becomes  complacency,  and 
interferes  with  the  militancy;  the  militancy  easily 
becomes  harsh,  and  interferes  with  the  charity;  the 
caritas  naturally  leads  to  heartache  and  anxiety,  and 
interferes  with  the  faith.  Most  individual  Christians 
have  gone  astray  in  one  or  more  of  these  ways;  and 
whole  epochs  of  the  Church  have  forgotten  or  under- 
emphasized  one  of  these  essential  aspects  of  the  re- 
ligion. But  the  greatness  of  Christianity  lay  pre- 
cisely in  its  synthesis;  and  it  is  not  too  much  to  say 
that  the  cardinal  faults  of  the  Church  to-day  result 
from  its  neglect  of  one  or  the  other  of  these  essential 
Christian  virtues. 

Faith  is  something  that  we  are  afraid  of,  and  prop- 
erly  enough  afraid  of  in  these  latter  days.  It  has 
so  often  meant  the  effort  of  believing  what  is  irra- 
tional,  unevidenced,   or  obviously  untrue.     Because 


22  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

of  faitli,  the  spread  of  a  sane  and  scientific  world- 
view  is  still  seriously  blocked.  But  what  we  need  is, 
after  all,  not  less  faith,  but  a  better  founded  faith. 
There  are  some  things  which  it  is  hard  to  believe 
psychologically,  though  it  is  not  hard  rationally  —  as 
when  the  child  learning  to  swim  is  told  that  the 
water  will  buoy  him  up  if  he  lies  still,  or  moves  his 
arms  gently.  That  is  the  proper  province  for  faith 
—  to  keep  us  believing  ardently,  not  in  ^'  what  we 
know  ain't  true,"  but  in  what  we  know  can  he  made 
true,  if  we  will.  As  in  William  James'  famous  para- 
ble of  the  Alpine  climber  who  needed  faith  to  enable 
him  to  jump  the  chasm  which  confronted  him,  so  we 
need  faith  as  we  face  the  larger  task  of  redeeming  our 
individual  lives  and  the  social  order  which  so  cramps 
and  brutalizes  men  and  women  all  about  us. 

Faith  we  must  have,  not  only  for  the  joy  of  it,  but 
for  its  dynamic;  faith  in  the  coming,  in  spite  of  ap- 
pearances, which  are  so  often  disheartening,  of  the 
Kingdom  of  God.  The  briefest  survey  of  the  S^mop- 
tic  Gospels,  and  of  Paul's  letters,  shows  them  athrob 
with  this  faith.  The  millennialism  of  these  source- 
documents  of  Christianity  is  somewhat  local  and 
naive,  to  be  sure ;  it  has  needed  translation  into  terms 
which  generations  of  men  could  accept.  But  it  was  a 
vast  pity  that  the  Church  came  so  quickly  to  put  its 
millennial  order  into  another  and  supernatural 
world,  instead  of  looking  for  it  here  and  soon,  on 
earth.  The  phrase  Kingdom  of  Heaven  readily  lent 
itself  to  this  interpretation.  But  that  phrase  was 
simply  a  reverent  circumlocution  for  Kingdom  of 
God  —  the  word  God  being  avoided  by  the  pious,  as 
too  sacred  to  utter.  And  that  Kingdom  meant,  for 
the  writers  of  the  early  New  Testament  documents,  a 
New  Age,   expected  presently  here  on  earth,  when 


THE  CHRISTIAN  GOSPEL  23 

men  should  live  in  accordance  with  the  divine  laws, 
and  peace,  justice,  and  prosperity  should  be  universal. 
Modern  translators  render  the  phrase  Reign  of  God 
—  which  properly  connotes  its  temporal,  rather  than 
spatial  meaning.  It  was  a  noble  vision.  It  em- 
bodied a  profound  discontent  with  the  sort  of  social 
order  which  the  world  had  hitherto  accepted  as  nec- 
essary, a  lifting  of  the  horizon,  a  farther  vista,  a  new 
goal  for  effort  and  hope.  No  one  who  has  ever  caught 
this  vision  can  be  content  with  the  world  as  it  is;  no 
one  who  has  ever  come  into  contact  with  the  personal- 
ity of  Christ  can  help  catching  something  of  his  pro- 
found faith  in  the  coming  of  this  Better  World. 

But  this  faith  is  not  a  merely  passive  faith,  enabling 
men  to  bear  the  ills  of  life  with  serenity,  it  is  a 
militant  faith,  bidding  them  dare  to  strive  to  conquer 
those  ills.  The  Stoics  and  the  Epicureans  both  re- 
treated from  an  evil  world.  But  Jesus  summoned 
men  not  to  flee  from  evil  but  to  overcome  it.  He 
came  to  bring  not  peace  with  the  powers  of  darkness, 
but  a  sword.  The  Church,  to  be  sure,  here  again  has 
often  forgotten  its  mission;  men  who  thought  them- 
selves Christian  have  turned  their  backs  on  the  world 
and  been  content  with  a  negative  ideal  of  sinlessness. 
But  such  is  not  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  or  of  the 
Church  in  its  best  days.  Rather,  that  teaching  de- 
mands not  only  war  to  the  death  with  the  selfish  and 
the  carnal  in  our  own  hearts,  but  war  to  the  death 
with  regnant  evil  in  the  world. 

Buddhism  preached  salvation,  safety,  escape  from 
life,  oblivion,  Nirvana.  Not  such  is  our  religion. 
The  Christian  emphasis  upon  love,  caritas,  must  not 
make  us  suppose  that  Jesus  was  a  mollycoddle,  or  his 
religion  one  for  the  coward  or  the  shirk.  No,  the  re- 
ligion of  Christ  offers  salvation  not  through  oblivion. 


24  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

but  through  service.  And  service  means  warfare; 
not  warfare  against  other  men  —  that  was  the  error 
of  the  crusaders  —  but  warfare  against  wrong  ideals, 
evil  habits,  unjust  and  cruel  practices  and  demands. 
Jesus  was  a  young  man.  Christianity  is  not  a  re- 
ligion to  turn  to  for  consolation  when,  in  middle  age, 
the  time  has  come  to  "  settle  down.''  It  is  a  religion 
for  youth,  and  for  the  eternally  young ;  a  religion  that 
calls  upon  every  bit  of  our  energy  and  courage,  that 
bids  us  not  save  our  lives  but  lose  them.  Christian- 
ity is  an  adventure,  a  cause;  it  ought  to  enlist  all  the 
boldest  and  bravest  spirits;  it  will  some  day  remake 
the  world. 

But  again,  this  militant  religion  condemns  and 
combats  only  the  evil  in  men ;  at  the  same  time  it  sees 
the  spark  of  good  in  all,  it  welcomes  all  as  brothers, 
it  preaches  the  doctrine  of  universal  love.  ^'  By  this 
shall  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have 
love  one  to  another.''  To  love  God  and  man,  Jesus 
is  reported  to  have  said,  is  sufficient  to  "  inherit  eter- 
nal life."  This  means  that  we  must  care  so  much 
for  others  that  we  give  of  our  effort  to  help  them. 
Christian  love  is  not  sentimentality,  it  is  service.  It 
implies  not  merely  tolerance  but  genuine  understand- 
ing and  fellowship  with  those  whose  manners  and 
morals  are  different  from  our  own,  a  sense  of  brother- 
hood that  should  include,  for  us,  negroes  and  Chinese, 
"  inferior  races,"  "  lower  classes,"  the  dirty,  the 
ignorant,  the  stupid,  the  childish,  and  all  the  people 
with  whom  we  do  not  instinctively  choose  to  asso- 
ciate. It  implies  patience  and  forgiveness,  unfailing 
tenderness  and  good  humor  toward  those  who  irritate 
us  or  ill-use  us.  It  implies  loving  your  enemies,  lov- 
ing the  unlovable.  It  implies  giving  up  all  censo- 
riousness,  all  resentfulness  at  injuries,  all  unpleasant 


THE  CHRISTIAN  GOSPEL  25 

gossip,  aU  impatient  and  hot-tempered  words  and 
thoughts.  It  implies  kindness  and  cheerfulness, 
which  Stevenson  once  declared  ^^  come  before  all 
morality."  They  do.  They  are  religion.  They  are 
Christianity. 

This  then  is  the  way  in  which  Christianity  saves 
us :  it  frees  our  minds  from  selfish  and  petty  interests, 
it  gives  us  something  big  and  worth  while  for  which 
to  live.  The  Christian  life  is  the  dedicated  life. 
Christianity  has  sometimes  been  perverted  into  mere 
contemplative  worship  and  submission;  the  passive 
virtues  —  gentleness,  purity,  meekness,  abstinence, 
and  the  rest  —  have  been  overemphasized.  That  was 
not  Christ's  Christianity.  His  life  was  a  passion  for 
helpfulness,  his  call  was  a  challenge  to  men  to  re- 
pent —  to  do  works  worthy  of  repentance.  The  doc- 
trine of  the  CrosSj  which  later  teaching  made  the 
heart  of  Christianity,  was  not  a  mere  negative  re- 
nunciation, but  a  vigorous  choosing,  yes,  and  a  re- 
joicing in,  the  life  of  self-sacrificing  service. 

This  is  Christianity;  it  is  the  real  thing.  There  is 
much  else  that  has  been  called  Christianity,  but  this 
is  what  is  cardinal,  and  what  is  common  to  all  forms 
of  the  religion  —  the  imperishable  flame  within  the 
creeds.  We  do  not  easily  realize  how  new  and  revolu- 
tionary this  teaching  was  to  the  Grseco-Roman  world. 
It  was,  indeed,  only  the  logical  consummation  of  the 
Jewish  religion.  But  the  Jewish  religion  had  been, 
except  for  a  few  prophetic  visions,  quite  exclusively 
nationalistic;  it  remained  for  Christianity  to  preach 
the  Brotherhood  of  all  men.  The  Brotherhood  of 
Man  —  the  doctrine  of  love  and  faith  —  it  sounds  ri- 
diculously simple.  But  the  simplest  things  are  the 
hardest  and  the  most  worth  while.  The  essence  of 
Christianity  can  be  understood  by  a  child  —  as  Jesus 


26  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

said ;  but  to  practise  it  faithfully  requires  the  patience 
and  courage  of  a  saint. 

It  is  worth  emphasizing,  moreover,  that  Christian- 
ity is  not  only  a  way  to  live,  but  the  way  that  Christ 
lived.  It  gives  us  not  only  a  precept  but  an  example. 
Hence  it  is  natural,  and  of  great  importance,  that  we 
should  feel  a  personal  loyalty  to  our  Leader.  He  was 
a  great  religious  genius,  who  saw  deep  into  the  true 
values  of  life.  He  expressed  his  insight  in  incom- 
parable sayings,  which  have  not  become  obsolete  with 
the  passage  of  time.  He  was  a  moving  example  of 
his  own  teaching,  in  his  life  and  in  his  tragic  martyr- 
death.  His  name  has  become  a  symbol,  and  in  that 
name  millions  have  been  saved.  Around  the  im- 
pulse that  he  gave  has  gathered  this  great  historic 
movement  that  has  done  more  than  anything  else  for 
the  spiritual  life  of  the  world.  Saviour  he  has  been 
widely  called.  But  since  that  word  so  easily  implies 
passivity  on  the  part  of  the  individual,  and  miracu- 
lous power  on  the  part  of  Christ,  it  is  wiser,  perhaps, 
to  use  the  simpler,  but  equally  reverent  term,  Leader. 
He  led  the  way;  it  is  for  us  to  follow  in  his  steps. 

Our  reverence  for  his  personality  and  his  insight 
must  not  blind  us,  however,  to  the  fact  that  there  are 
some  slight  aspects  of  his  teaching  which  we  must 
discard.  He  was  a  child  of  his  times,  as  every  one 
is ;  and  elements  that  are  local  and  accidental  mingle 
in  his  teaching  with  what  is  essential  and  distinctively 
Christian.  No  one  can  believe  to-day  quite  as  Jesus 
did;  it  is  only  by  misunderstanding  his  words  and 
misreading  history  that  any  one  can  suppose  that  he 
does.  Jesus  evidently  —  if  the  recorded  sayings  are 
at  all  trustworthy  —  lived,  as  did  his  pious  predeces- 
sors, contemporaries,  and  followers,  in  the  expecta- 
tion of  an  imminent  and  catastrophic  coming  of  the 


THE  CHRISTIAN  GOSPEL  27 

Kingdom  of  God,  to  be  inaugurated  by  a  dramatic 
Judgment  Day.  The  bodies  of  the  dead  were  to  rise 
from  the  grave  and  be  judged,  the  Messiah  was  to  ap- 
pear on  the  clouds  of  Heaven  to  separate  the  saved 
from  the  lost.  This  picture  of  coming  events,  which 
had  become  more  or  less  stereotyped  in  the  apocalyp- 
tic thought  of  the  times,  is  found  in  all  of  the  Synop- 
tic Gospels,  in  Paul's  letters,  and  in  a  large  part  of 
the  remaining  early-Christian  literature.  Jesus 
could  hardly  have  been  brought  up  on  the  Hebrew 
scriptures,  as  they  were  then  interpreted,  without 
sharing  passionately  this  hope.  The  fact  —  which 
seems  well  evidenced  —  that  he  expected  to  play  him- 
self the  leading  role  in  this  startling  series  of  events 
is  hardly  surprising,  in  view  of  his  great  genius  and 
personal  power.  But  we  know  little  of  his  life  and 
thought,  save  the  preaching  of  his  Way  of  Salvation ; 
and  what  influences  or  what  visions  led  him  to  the 
belief  in  his  own  coming  Messiahship  it  is  impossible 
now  to  say. 

This  whole  dramatic  picture  of  the  imminent  in- 
auguration of  the  New  Era  was,  of  course,  an  illusion. 
But  the  illusion  was  no  greater  than  those  under 
which  most  great  teachers  have  labored.  The  social- 
ist movement,  for  example,  has  had  its  —  in  some  re- 
spects similar  —  yearning  toward  a  juster  and  hu- 
maner  social  order  obscured  by  the  illusion  that  a 
Day  was  coming  —  not  unlike  the  Dies  irae  of  early 
Christianity  —  when  the  oppressed  proletariat  every- 
where would  rise  in  their  might  and  overthrow  their 
Capitalist  oppressors,  and  inaugurate  thereafter  a 
socialistic  Kingdom  of  God  on  earth.  Most  of  us  are 
convinced  that  the  millennium  can  come  in  no  such 
cataclysmic  style,  but  is  to  be  gradually  approached 
by  the  patient  labor  and  sacrifice  of  many  genera- 


28  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

tions.  But  the  over-sanguine  expectations  of  Christ 
and  the  early  Christians  must  not  dim  for  us  the 
splendor  and  inherent  right ness  of  their  vision  and 
of  the  gospel  of  Love  and  Faith  which  they  saw 
clearly  to  be  the  means  to  its  realization. 

It  is  surprising  how  little  Jesus'  teaching  was  prej- 
udiced by  the  prescientific  ideas  of  his  times  and  the 
provincialities  of  his  countrymen.  Its  clarity  and 
sanity  and  "  sweet  reasonableness  "  are  very  striking^ 
by  the  side,  for  example,  of  Paul's  labored  and  some- 
times sophistical  arguments,  or  by  the  side  of  any 
other  contemporary  teaching.  What  though  Jesus 
supposed  mental  and  nervous  disease  to  be  demonic 
possession,  what  though  he  shared  the  errors  of  his 
countrymen  with  regard  to  the  authorship  of  Old 
Testament  writings,  what  though  he  knew  little  or 
no  science,  politics,  art !  The  heart  of  his  teaching  is 
absolutely  and  immortally  true,  and  what,  above 
everything  else,  the  world  needs  for  its  salvation. 

The  traditional  conception  of  Christ  is  drawn 
partly  from  the  ideas  of  the  apostolic  and  early  post- 
apostolic  Christians,  as  expressed  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  partly  from  later  ideas  read  back  into  those 
narratives.  Christ  quickly  became  for  his  followers 
an  ideal  being  —  as  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  his  own 
name,  Jesus,  was  displaced  by  the  title  Christ,  Mes- 
siah, the  Anointed  One, —  his  significance  as  revealer 
of  God,  saviour  of  men,  being  of  greater  importance 
than  his  human  personality.  It  is  unfortunate  that 
this  theological  conception  of  Jesus  has  clouded  our 
understanding  of  the  events  of  his  life  —  that  the 
stories  which  the  credulous  and  miracle-loving  evan- 
gelists repeated,  and  embroidered,  should  be  taught 
as  literal  fact  in  the  twentieth  century,  while  those 


THE  CHRISTIAN  GOSPEL  29 

sayings,  with  all  the  marks  of  genuineness,  which  are 
hard  to  reconcile  with  the  picture  thus  outlined,  are 
relegated  to  the  background  as  "  dark  sayings."  It 
is  unfortunate  that  most  Christians  should  have  so 
unreal  and  naive  a  conception  of  the  very  virile,  red- 
blooded,  real  man  who  has  become  their  hero.  But 
after  all,  it  is  more  important  that  men  should  have 
a  concrete  and  ideal  hero,  than  that  they  sliould  have 
a  correct  historical  comprehension  of  his  life  and  per- 
sonality. And  though  the  meek,  mystical,  and  won- 
der-working ecclesiastical  Christ  compares  very  un- 
favorably, to  the  unprejudiced  eye,  with  the  vigor- 
ous, passionate,  intensely  loving,  intensely  suffering, 
intensely  human  Jesus  that  modern  historical  schol- 
arship has  recovered  for  us,  still  we  must  acknowl- 
edge that  generations  have  drawn  comfort  and  in- 
spiration from  the  Church's  Christ,  and  be  content. 

The  "  orthodox,''  of  course,  will  not  agree  to  the 
picture  of  Christ  thus  suggested,  or  to  the  conception 
of  the  Christian  Gospel  above  unfolded.  Christian- 
ity to  them  means  essentially  a  theology  —  that  cos- 
mological-historical  w^orld-view  of  creation,  fall,  re- 
demption by  vicarious  atonement,  and  impending 
judgment  which  was  worked  out  by  thinkers  steeped 
in  the  Hebraic  traditions  and  the  later  Greek  super- 
naturalistic  philosophy  of  the  early  Christian  cen- 
turies. Now  the  fact  that  the  dogmas  then  conceived 
and  since  become  traditional  were  not  a  part  of 
Jesus'  own  teaching  need  not  lead  to  their  rejection. 
Christianity,  to  be  a  living  religion,  must  be  a  grow- 
ing religion,  and  incorporate  into  itself  the  best 
thought  of  every  age.  But  what  the  "  orthodox " 
fail  to  realize  is  that  what  was  convincing  reasoning 
for  the  early  centuries  is  nonsense  to  the  twentieth. 


30  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

And,  moreover,  that  all  this  speculation  was  never 
anything  but  external  wrapping,  and  not  the  heart  of 
Christianity. 

It  is  high  time,  then,  that  the  Church  should  free 
the  kernel  from  the  husks  in  its  traditions,  should 
emphasize  not  the  errors  but  the  truths  of  Christian- 
ity. Our  religion  is  cheaply  rated  when  it  is  held  to 
be  a  set  of  dogmas,  largely  discredited  by  modern 
knowledge  —  instead  of  being  seen  as  a  flame  of 
sacrificing  love  that  purifies  the  will  of  selfishness 
and  lethargy  and  gives  life  new  meaning  and  power. 
If  the  traditionalists  insist  on  giving  the  name 
Christianity  to  their  tottering  theology,  the  real 
Christianity  may  come  to  be  called  by  another  name. 
But  it  will  be  the  reality,  and  the  other  but  a  decay- 
ing husk. 

Is  it  not,  after  all,  as  Matthew  Arnold  said,  "A 
matter  where  practice  is  everything  and  theory 
nothing  "  ?  Certainly  Christ  had  no  interest  either 
in  theology  or  in  ecclesiasticism.  His  whole  concern 
was  to  heal,  to  inspire,  to  teach  men  to  live  the  God- 
like life  —  which  is  now  called,  after  him,  the  Christ- 
like life  —  to  arouse  in  them  a  faith  in  the  coming  of 
the  Better  World.  Who  is  the  Christian,  then?  Not 
merely  he  who  believes  in  the  "  God  in  Three  Per- 
sons "  of  modern  orthodoxy,  in  the  Atonement,  in 
Heaven  and  Hell, —  not  he  at  all,  unless  he  believes  in 
the  spirit  of  Christ,  the  spirit  of  love  and  forgiveness, 
of  charity,  purity,  self-surrender,  and  undying  faith ; 
if  he  has  that  spirit,  which  everywhere  is  known  as 
the  Christian  spirit,  his  belief  on  these  theological 
matters  is  immaterial.  The  Christian  is  he  who  seeks 
to  live  the  life  that  Christ  lived  and  taught,  who  takes 
his  yoke  upon  him  and  learns  of  him,  and  finds  that 
his  yoke  is  easy  and  his  burden  light. 


CHAPTER  FOUR 

CHRISTIANIZING   CHURCH-MEMBERS 

Can  the  Cliurch  ever  hope  to  succeed  in  inaMng 
any  great  proportion  of  its  members  really  Christian 
in  character?  If  so,  how  shall  it  set  to  work  on  this 
great  undertaking?  In  all  times  it  has  succeeded 
with  a  few  of  its  members.  Are  these  true  Christians 
of  different  clay  from  the  rest  of  us?  No,  at  least  not 
in  great  measure;  spirituality  is  not  inherited  but 
acquired.  There  is  no  inherent  reason  why  the  great 
mass  of  our  people  should  not  be  guided  into  this 
more  beautiful,  more  useful,  and  happier  life  which 
Christ  proposed  to  men.  It  is,  then,  of  great  im- 
portance to  consider  the  means  available  to  this  end. 

At  the  outset  we  must  recognize  that  the  methods 
suitable  to  an  older  generation  are  no  longer  available 
for  us.  Until  we  realize  this,  and  work  out  new 
methods  for  the  new  age,  we  are  in  danger  of  getting 
fewer  rather  than  more  men  and  women  of  marked 
spirituality.  The  fact  is,  in  a  word,  that  the  older 
type  of  piety  was  produced  chiefly  by  daily  hours  of 
poring  over  the  Bible,  and  prayerful  offering  of  al- 
legiance to  its  teachings.  But,  for  good  or  ill,  the 
modern  world  is  losing  the  naive  conception  of  the 
Bible,  as  an  oracle,  a  source  of  ultimate  authority, 
which  led  to  that  method  of  religious  education.  The 
younger  generation  reads  the  Bible  as  a  set  of  in- 
teresting and  often  inspiring  historical  documents; 

31 


32  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

but  the  uniqueness  of  the  Bible  is  gone.  It  can  no 
longer  have  the  same  power  of  "  suggestion ''  that  it 
had  over  the  minds  of  an  earlier  generation. 

There  are  gains  that  go  with  this  loss.  The  older, 
exclusively  Bible-bred  piety  tended,  naturally,  to  nar- 
rowness; the  virtues  not  preached  in  the  Bible  were 
not  fostered.  There  was  little  breadth  of  sympathy 
with  alien  ideals,  little  of  the  spirit  that  keeps  ever 
seeking  for  new  ideas,  little  real  open-mindedness, 
little  passion  for  truth.  All  the  moral  problems  were 
supposed  to  be  solved.  The  attitude  of  credulity,  ac- 
ceptance, was  placed  above  that  of  a  healthy  criti- 
cism; free  thought  was  frowned  upon  as  dangerous. 
Because  of  this,  the  Church  has  been  the  ultra-con- 
servative force  in  the  community  and  seldom  assumed 
leadership  in  the  solving  of  the  new  problems  of  each 
generation. 

Altogether,  it  is  no  wonder  that  the  world  has 
looked  rather  askance  at  Christian  piety.  It  has 
seemed  too  dogmatic,  too  blind,  too  emotionalistic,  too 
backward-looking,  too  content  with  the  personal  vir- 
tues. We  must  develop  a  broader,  more  practical, 
redder-blooded  piety,  a  piety  with  a  sense  of  humor 
and  a  love  of  all  innocent  pleasures,  an  outward  and 
forward  looking  piety,  terribly  intent  on  making  over 
our  world,  and  willing  to  have  its  worth  measured 
by  its  observable  value  to  the  community.  For  this 
—  perhaps  less  serene  and  peaceful,  but  really  higher, 
because  more  useful  —  piety,  we  need  more  than  the 
Bible.  After  all,  it  is  not  with  the  problems  of 
Moses,  or  of  Paul,  that  we  are  concerned,  but  with  the 
problems  of  today.  And  the  practically  exclusive  use 
of  the  Bible  keeps  the  Church  too  much  at  arm's 
length  from  actual  life.  The  younger  generation 
feels  this  unreality,  this  ecclesiastical  remoteness,  and 


CHRISTIANIZING  CHURCH-MEMBERS  33 

is  restive  under  it.  Their  real  interests  and  prob- 
lems lie  outside. 

Another  method  approved  by  our  elders  was  the 
revivalistic  method,  the  method  of  abrupt  conversion 
accompanied  by  intense  emotional  stress  and  followed 
by  a  sense  of  attainment  and  inward  content.  Such 
methods  have  fallen  under  suspicion,  owing  to  the 
observation  that  people  thus  "  converted ''  so  often 
turn  out  to  be  little,  if  at  all;  different  from  what  they 
were  before.  There  have,  indeed,  been  cases  where 
such  an  emotional  crisis  has  marked  the  turning- 
point  in  a  life;  and  perhaps  periodic  waves  of  emo- 
tionalism are  good  for  the  average  soul,  cleansing  it 
from  the  dust  of  petty  cares  and  giving  it  a  new 
impetus  toward  its  eternal  goal.  But  the  reliance 
upon  this  once-and-for-all  method  of  Christianizing 
people  is  very  dangerous.  Very  often  nothing  really 
comes  of  it ;  it  is  a  mere  emotional  debauch,  a  passing 
exaltation  of  spirit,  followed  by  a  slow  sag  into  the 
old  worldliness  or  sensuality. 

The  point  that  should  never  be  forgotten  is  that  the 
kindling  of  the  emotions  is  only  a  means.  If  prop- 
erly used,  it  may  be  a  valuable  means.  But  it  is  of 
no  use  at  all  unless  it  eventuates  in  an  actually  al- 
tered and  purified  life.  As  Dr.  H.  F.  Cope  puts  it,  in 
his  admirable  volume  on  Religious  Education  in  the 
Church,  "  If  emotional  experiences  are  to  have  value, 
the  stimulus  must  stimulate  to  something ;  it  must  be 
a  beginning  and  not  a  terminus." 

More  than  this,  if  nothing  practical  comes  of  the 
experience,  it  has  been  worse  than  useless,  it  has  been 
harmful,  by  making  the  subject  less  responsive  to  fu- 
ture emotional  stimuli.  To  an  ardent  soul  it  is  a 
great  joy  to  experience  one  of  these  tidal  waves  of  the 
spirit,  or  even  to  sit  under  an  eloquent  preacher  and 


34  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

feel  one's  emotional  nature  stirred,  to  laughter  or  to 
tears.  But  for  the  most  part  it  is  mere  dissipation, 
no  better  and  no  worse  than  the  emotional  exaltation 
one  may  experience  at  a  play,  a  movie,  a  concert,  or 
in  reading  a  powerful  work  of  fiction.  These  emo- 
tions form  a  little  world  of  their  own  within  the 
mind,  offering  a  grateful  release  from  the  cares  and 
worries  and  blunders  of  the  week.  But  it  is  a  danger- 
ous release,  unless  out  of  the  heightened  mood  there 
emerges  a  new  grip  upon  impulse,  a  new  bent  to  the 
will. 

In  short,  the  revivalistic  method  is  altogether  too 
uncertain.  And  even  when  it  has  succeeded,  it  has 
been  because  of  an  antecedent  period  of  conscious  or 
sub-conscious  preparation.  In  general,  it  is  true  that 
to  alter  human  character  requires  long  effort  and 
perseverance ;  it  is  "  dogged  as  does  it.'^  That  is  why 
the  daily  poring  over  the  Bible  was  so  effective,  for 
those  who  could  look  upon  it  as  the  divine  oracle  and 
rule  of  life. 

Is  the  problem  hopeless?  Is  there  no  possible  way 
to  produce  a  piety  of  a  practical  sort  among  great 
numbers  of  men  and  women?  No  one  can  think  so 
who  has  seen  what  skilful  education  can  do  with  even 
the  most  unpromising  material.  No,  the  trouble  is 
that  the  Church  has  not  clearly  enough  realized  the 
exact  nature  of  its  problem.  Its  problem  is  to  form 
Christian  character;  and  the  process  of  character- 
formation  is,  above  all  else,  a  process  of  training  the 
will.  It  is  easy  enough  to  have  ideals;  but  to  get 
them  incorporated  into  conduct  is  the  point.  This 
requires  the  use  of  powerful  and  unremitting  forces. 
It  profits  us  nothing  that  we  give  assent  to  spiritual 
truths,  that  we  wish  ourselves  pure  and  kind  and  self- 
controlled,  it  is  not  enough  that  we  will  in  our  best 


CHRISTIANIZING  CHURCH-MEMBERS  35 

hours  to  follow  the  highest.  The  tides  of  longing  to 
live  nobly  will  evaporate,  the  impulse  of  the  moment 
will  have  its  way.  Only  the  trained  will  can  be  de- 
pended on  to  keep  true ;  and  so  the  crux  of  the  prob- 
lem of  the  Church  is  the  problem  of  directing  and 
strengthening  the  will. 

Happily,  we  have  to-day  an  excellent  illustration 
of  success  in  this  undertaking.  I  venture  to  say  that 
the  best  results  in  the  building  of  Christian  charac- 
ter that  are  being  attained  to-day  are  being  attained 
by  the  organization  of  Boy  Scouts;  and  in  scarcely 
lesser  degree  by  the  Girl  Scouts  and  Camp  Fire  Girls. 
In  i>roportion  to  the  number  of  boys  and  girls  they 
are  reaching,  they  are  doing  far  more  for  the  youth 
of  the  country  than  the  church-services  and  church- 
schools  are  doing.  And  this  is  because  they  have  un- 
derstood the  psychology  of  youth  —  I  would  even  say, 
the  psychology  of  the  human  being  —  better  than  the 
churches  have  understood  it.  Of  course  they  succeed 
in  very  varying  degree  in  different  cases,  according 
to  the  human  material  they  have  to  deal  with,  and 
the  adequacy  of  the  scout-master  or  guardian  to  his 
or  her  task  as  guide  and  adviser.  But  on  the  whole 
they  are  succeeding  well  enough  to  make  this  the 
most  promising  venture  in  the  moral  training  of  youth 
that  has  ever  been  devised. 

What  is  the  secret  of  their  success?  First  and 
foremost,  they  really  interest  the  average  boy  and 
girl  —  which  is  more  than  we  can  honestly  say  of 
church  and  Sunday-school.  We  may  as  well  make 
up  our  minds  to  this :  you  cannot  save  unless  you  can 
interest.  And  the  average  boy,  to  be  quite  frank,  is 
bored  —  or  irked  —  in  church  or  Sunday-school.  He 
has  to  be  pushed  to  attend,  he  gets  little  or  nothing 
out  of  it.     It  is  what  his  parents  want  him  to  be  in- 


36  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

terested  in,  not  what  he  is  interested  in.  He  has  no 
share  in  its  program,  no  opportunity  to  express  him- 
self in  it.  Jewish  history  (or  pseudo-history),  sup- 
posed acts  of  Chidstian  apostles,  exhortations  of 
Christian  missionaries  to  their  infant  congregations 

—  all  this  is  not  only  remote,  but  seldom  gives  him  a 
vision  of  the  sort  of  hero  he  really  admires.  This  is 
partly  due  to  the  false  atmosphere  of  goody-goody 
which  is  created  by  tradition  about  these  really  red- 
blooded  men.  But,  however  that  may  be,  these  are 
not  his  natural  heroes,  and  it  is  very  difficult  to  make 
him  give  more  than  a  languid  attention  to  them. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  name  "  scout,"  with  all  the 
glamour  of  danger  and  endurance  and  skill  that  it  sug- 
gests, the  wearing  of  a  khaki  uniform,  the  romance  of 
outdoors  unfolded  to  him,  the  opportunities  for  de- 
veloping skill  in  all  sorts  of  alluring  and  useful  ways 

—  all  this,  and  much  more  in  the  very  fascinating 
program  of  scouting,  not  only  rouses  and  keeps  the 
boy's  interest,  but  keeps  it  in  general  at  a  pretty  high 
pitch. 

To  say  that  the  boy  is  interested  does  not  go  far 
enough;  the  maintaining  of  the  scout  code  becomes 
his  own  interest.  Whereas  at  church,  or  even  at 
young  people's  devotional  meetings,  the  boy  com- 
monly is  in  the  attitude  of  feeling  that  he  ought  to 
believe  and  desire  this  and  that,  in  the  scout  code 
he  has  what  represents  his  own  actual  highest  ideals. 
The  great  international  scout  movement  is  his 
movement,  he  is  part  of  it,  and  is  proud  of  it.  In- 
stead of  being  exhorted,  preached  at,  repressed,  his 
own  longing  to  be  a  good  scout  is  enough.  "  A  scout 
is  trustworthy;  a  scout  is  loyal;  a  scout  is  helpful; 
a  scout  is  clean;  a  scout  is  cheerful;  a  scout  is 
reverent."     The  principle  of  ^'  suggestion  "  is  used  in 


CHRISTIANIZING  CHURCH-MEMBERS  37 

the  adroitest  way  in  this  scout  law,  which  is  worth 
a  thousand  prohibitions.  Boys  are  just  as  eager  to 
be  autonomous  as  grown-ups;  let  them  have  a  code 
that  is  their  own  code,  and  they  will  stick  to  it  through 
rain  and  shine.  They  are  far  more  sensitive  to  the 
approval  and  blame  of  their  equals  than  to  that  of 
their  elders.  When  they  attain  to  the  privilege  of 
being  a  scout,  and  repeat  the  Scout  Oath :  "  On  my 
honor  I  will  do  my  best  to  do  my  duty  to  God  and  my 
country,  and  to  obey  the  scout  law ;  to  help  other  peo- 
ple at  all  times;  to  keep  myself  physically  strong, 
mentally  awake,  and  morally  straight,"  they  are  not 
merely  hearing  what  their  elders  want  them  to  do, 
they  are  saying  what  they  themselves  want  to  do,  and 
will  to  do. 

More  than  this:  the  scout  not  only  develops  the 
power  of  self -compulsion  (which  is  the  essence  of  con- 
science) by  his  personal  espousal  of  the  scout  code, 
but  his  scouting  activities  require  him  to  put  this  code 
into  constant  practice.  He  learns  not  by  being 
taught,  but  by  doing  —  which  is  the  best  way  to  learn 
many  things,  and  the  only  way  to  learn  character. 
It  is  ideals  actually  made  use  of  that  count.  Sunday- 
school  teaching  and  church  exhortation  rarely  get 
focused  upon  any  positive  thing  the  boy  is  about  to 
do;  it  is  tucked  away  with  his  stiff  dress-up  clothes 
and  the  other  uncomfortable  memories  of  Sunday, 
when  the  boy  starts  out  on  his  real  life  on  Monday 
morning.  If  he  is  a  scout,  however,  he  is  conscious 
of  being  a  scout  on  Monday  morning;  he  must  begin 
to  look  for  the  opportunity  to  do  his  daily  "  good 
turn,"  he  has  the  honor  of  his  troop  at  stake,  he  has 
all  sorts  of  useful  and  dififlcult  achievements  to  work 
toward  in  his  spare  moments.  Instead  of  a  vague 
feeling  that  he  must  be  "  good,"  "  keep  out  of  mis- 


38  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

chief/^  refrain  from  this  or  that,  his  mind  is  fixed 
upon  a  positive  program  toward  which  natural  in- 
stincts lead  him,  and  which  is  gradually  making  him 
self-reliant,  resourceful,  sturdy,  and  full  of  a  clean, 
normal  zest  in  life.  Boys  are  not  naturally  bad,  they 
are  resourceless,  they  need  things  to  do.  Wrong  do- 
ing is  energy  gone  astray.  Salvation  lies  in  their 
having  wholesome  activities  —  and  so  far  as  possible 
they  should  be  outdoor  activities  —  so  shot  through 
with  moral  values  that  out  of  the  very  joy  of  doing 
will  crystallize  social  ideals  and  personal  power. 

In  the  nature  of  the  case,  church-services  and  Sun- 
day-schools, with  their  hour  or  two  a  week,  can  ac- 
complish little.  Character-huUding  takes  time. 
Just  as  the  saints  of  an  earlier  day  attained  their 
type  of  spirituality  through  daily  poring  over  the 
Bible  and  self-examination  and  prayer,  so  the  men  of 
strong  and  sweet  character  that  we  need  to-day  can 
only  be  produced  by  some  force  working  within  them 
every  day  in  the  week.  Scouting  is  such  a  seven-day- 
in-the-week  affair.  The  scout  is  on  his  honor  every 
hour  of  everv  day. 

Even  the  public  school  takes  less  than  a  quarter  of 
the  boy's  waking  time  during  the  year,  and  leaves  his 
play-hours  —  the  most  valuable  and  dangerous  part 
of  his  day  —  untouched.  It  rarely  gets  a  deep  hold 
on  the  boy's  allegiance.  And  although  much  can  be, 
and  ought  to  be,  done  toward  character-building  in 
the  schools,  the  school-atmosphere,  like  the  church- 
atmosphere,  remains  for  most  boys  an  alien  atmos- 
phere, so  that  the  ideas  there  set  before  him  and  the 
habits  there  required  often  do  not  transfer  to  the 
hours  of  his  own  free  life  and  become  his  very  own. 

It  may  be  objected  that  scouting  is  all  very  well, 
but    is    not    religious    education.     Well,    neither    is 


CHRISTIANIZING  CHURCH-MEMBERS  38 

Bible  study,  or  church-attendance,  in  itself.  These 
are  all  but  means  to  an  end  —  the  building  of 
Christian  character;  the  question  is,  which  is,  for 
boys  and  girls,  the  most  effective  means?  I  have  my- 
self no  doubt  as  to  the  answer.  But  in  any  case,  it  is 
clear  that  the  scouting  program  makes  its  members 
manly,  alert,  honorable,  and  courteous,  with  bodies 
trained  to  serve  their  wills,  and  wills  trained  to  ideals 
of  service.  And  since  there  is  no  conflict,  but  rather 
the  opportunity  for  heartiest  cooperation,  between 
church,  Sunday-school,  and  scout-troop,  there  is  no 
excuse  for  failure  on  the  part  of  the  churches  every- 
where to  use  the  scouting-program. 

As  it  is,  eighty  per  cent  of  the  troops  are  connected 
with  churches,  and  a  majority  of  scout-masters  are 
ministers  or  Sunday-school  workers.  But  as  yet  a 
scant  ten  per  cent  of  our  churches  are  using  the  move- 
ment, and  less  than  half  a  million  boys,  out  of  eight 
or  ten  millions,  are  enrolled.  The  scout  movement 
is  growing  rapidly,  however,  as  is  that  of  the  Camp 
Fire  Girls,  whose  program,  with  its  fascinating  sym- 
bolism and  poetry,  is  equally  efficacious  in  character- 
building.  Those  movements  should  be  linked  so 
closely  to  the  churches  that  they  will  form  a  natural 
doorway  to  Church-membership.  The  boys  and  girls 
should  be  made  to  feel,  as  they  grow  older,  that  the 
Church  is  the  great  organization  that  seeks  to  realize 
in  the  world  the  ideals  which  they  have  sought,  in 
their  way,  too,  to  realize,  and  so  is  their  natural  home. 

Now  it  w^ill  always  be  with  youth  that  most  can  be 
done.  But  we  older  people  are  still  in  some  degree 
plastic,  and  in  need  of  every  possible  help  in  the 
strengthening,  and  repairing,  and  further  building  of 
our  Christian  character.  The  success  with  younger 
people  of  the  movement  of  which  I  have  been  speak- 


40  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

ing,  should  be  fuH  of  suggestion  for  us.  For  after 
all,  the  psychology  of  the  adult  is  much  the  same  as 
that  of  youth. 

What  we  need  is,  perhaps  not  less  exhortation,  but 
certainly  more  ways  of  expressing  for  ourselves  our 
own  ideals;  we  need  participation  in  activities  that 
will  crystallize  our  ideals  into  actual  habits.  Church- 
membership  must  be  less  a  passive  acquiescence,  and 
more  a  personal  espousal,  in  which  we  pledge  our- 
selves to  definite,  concrete  standards  of  conduct,  and 
to  tangible  achievement,  as  the  scouts  do,  in  the  form 
of  effort  for  service.  No  amount  of  listening  to 
preaching  —  much  less  the  hour  or  two  a  week  of  the 
church-services  —  can  take  the  place  of  this  personal 
interest  and  activity.  The  church-service  is  to  many 
people  a  pleasant  emotional  exhDaration  ( of  the  only 
sort  respectable,  or  available,  on  Sunday),  the  pro- 
ducer of  a  Sunday  mood,  completely  forgotten  by 
Monday  morning's  breakfast,  and  never  focused  upon 
the  doings  of  the  week. 

It  may  be  objected  that  the  Church  is  not  to  be 
blamed  if  Christians  do  not  practise  their  Christian- 
ity. But  it  is  not  a  question  of  blame  that  I  am  con- 
cerned with,  it  is  the  question  how  the  Church  can 
succeed  in  doing  her  job.  Her  job  is  to  make  people 
live  Cliristianly J  not  to  provide  Sunday  entertain- 
ment. In  so  far  as  Christians  do  not  practise  their 
Christianity,  the  Church  has  not  yet  succeeded  in  do- 
ing her  job.  It  is  too  easily  assumed  that  there  must 
be  some  vital  effect  from  a  service  of  hymns,  Bible- 
readings,  exhortation.  But  experience  shows  that 
very  often  there  is  no  observable  effect  whatsoever. 
Going  to  church  is,  for  many  people,  like  going  to 
the  movies  —  except  that  going  to  church  gives  a  com- 
fortable illusion  of  having  done  one's  duty;  one  is 


CHRISTIANIZING  CHURCH-MEMBERS  41 

taken  out  of  oneself  and  mildly  exhilarated;  but  one 
turns  back  again  to  one's  week-day  clothes,  one's 
week-day  selfishness  and  pettiness  and  actual  working 
purposes. 

Is  it  not  clear,  then,  that  the  Church  should,  in  all 
humility,  learn  a  lesson  from  the  Scout  and  Camp 
Fire  movements,  should  not  only  utilize  these  pro- 
grams for  its  youth,  but  should  adopt  the  underlying 
psychology  of  these  movements  for  its  adult  member- 
ship? Great  numbers  of  these  boys  and  girls  are 
practising  their  simple  but  vital  code  more  loyally 
than  all  but  a  few  Christians  are  practising  their 
Christianity.  In  a  way,  the  Church  may  take  credit 
for  this  new  impulse  among  our  youth,  for  its  ideals 
are,  after  all,  the  old  Christian  ideals,  handed  down 
by  the  Church,  and  always  held  up  by  her,  if  only 
partially  lived  up  to.  But  our  boys  and  girls  are 
shaming  us.  Shall  we  let  them  grow  up  into  an  at- 
mosphere of  "  real  life  "  that  is  selfish,  hard,  material- 
istic, and  pleasure-loving?  Or  shall  we  train  the 
great  masses  of  our  older,  church-going  population  to 
practise  these  ideals  with  the  same  genuineness  of 
enthusiasm  ?  If  this  could  be  done,  we  should  breathe 
free  when  we  think  of  the  future  of  our  democracy. 

M.  Payot  declares  that  nine  tenths  of  our  woes  are 
due  to  our  weakness  of  will.  This  is,  no  doubt,  an 
exaggeration.  Many  even  of  our  self-caused  troubles 
come  from  ignorance.  Our  schools  and  colleges,  and 
our  press,  exist  to  correct  that  ignorance,  and  to  help 
us  grope  our  way  toward  the  solution  of  our  yet  un- 
solved problems.  But  the  A  B  C's  of  life  were  solved 
long  ago.  Our  Christian  code  is  not  to  be  just  be- 
lieved in,  "  accepted  "  as  our  ideal,  and  given  lip- 
reverence;  it  is  to  be  made  our  very  own,  hammered 
into  us  until  we  realize  every  hour  of  every  day  that 


42  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

"  a  Christian  is  trustworthy ;  a  Christian  is  loyal ;  a 
Christian  is  helpful ;  a  Christian  is  clean ;  a  Christian 
is  cheerful ;  .  .  .  a  Christian  is  reverent " ;  until  the 
will  to  practise  these  virtues  is  our  own  will,  and 
strong  enough  to  overcome  the  daily  temptations  that 
make  these  simple  virtues  so  difficult. 

A  world  of  people  who  practised  these  virtues  — 
what  an  altered  world  it  would  be !  It  would  be  the 
Kingdom  of  God  on  earth.  It  is  precisely  to  bring 
in  the  day  of  that  Kingdom  that  the  Church  exists. 
This  is  the  Church's  job;  and  until  it  succeeds  in  ac- 
tually getting  that  job  done,  it  cannot  rest  content. 


CHAPTER  FIVE 

CHRISTIANIZING   THE   COMMUNITY 

It  may  be  asked,  If  you  "  save  "  individuals,  what 
remains  to  be  done?  Is  not  a  community  of  Chris- 
tianized individuals  a  Christianized  community? 
The  answer  is  threefold. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Church  cannot  hope  to  reach 
and  Christianize  all  the  members  of  a  community. 
Those  whom  she  can  spiritualize  must  go  out  and 
fight  against  the  wrongs  committed  by  the  selfish  and 
the  sensual,  must  hold  out  their  hands  to  those  who 
are  the  victims  of  a  ruthless  commercialism  and  a  so- 
cial order  as  yet  but  little  permeated  by  the  spirit  of 
Christ. 

In  the  second  place,  it  is  precisely  in  the  doing  of 
this  that  a  man  becomes  Christian.  Being  converted, 
going  to  church,  keeping  pure,  these  are  preliminary 
steps;  Christianity  itself  is  service.  The  process  of 
saving  the  individual  is,  ultimately,  the  process  of 
making  him  live  for  the  community.  That  is  his  sal- 
vation. Righteousness  is  essentially  a  social  activity ; 
and  no  one  is  wholly  a  Christian  until  he  is  doing  his 
duty»by  his  fellows  in  every  social  relationship. 

In  the  third  place,  it  is  not  easy,  sometimes  not 
possible,  for  the  individual  to  be  thoroughly  Christian 
except  as  the  spirit  of  Christianity  has  permeated 
legislation  and  been  embodied  in  the  political  and 
industrial  order.  A  competitive  system  forces  the 
idealistic  to  some  extent  to  the  methods  in  general 

43 


44  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

use.  If  wages  are  too  low,  hours  too  long,  conditions 
of  work  unwholesome,  a  Christian  may  find  himself 
unable  to  introduce  local  amelioration  except  as  im- 
proved conditions  are  demanded  by  the  general  code 
and  exacted  from  all  the  rivals  in  a  given  industry. 
The  individual  is  caught  in  the  net  of  the  existing  so- 
cial order.  To  protest  against  its  inhumanities,  its 
injustice,  its  despiritualizing  effect,  is  of  little  use, 
except  as  that  protest  becomes  written  into  the  law 
of  the  land  and  made  binding  upon  Christian  and 
non-Christian  alike.  It  is  not  merely  human  souls, 
then,  that  must  be  Christianized,  but  also  the  struc- 
ture of  human  society  and  the  laws  upon  the  statute- 
books. 

It  seems  incredible  to  us  to-day  that  the  devout 
Christians  of  the  past  generation  should  have  done 
so  little  to  Christianize  our  industrial,  political,  in- 
ternational order.  What  were  they  thinking  of! 
With  saloons,  houses  of  vice,  vile  "  shows ''  in  e\erj 
city,  with  graft  and  boodle  rampant  in  government, 
with  newspapers  in  the  grip  of  selfish  class  interests, 
industries  run  for  the  private  profit  of  a  few  lucky 
owners,  with  children  working  long  hours  when  they 
ought  to  be  at  school,  with  the  luxury  of  the  rich 
jostling  the  bitter  need  of  the  poor,  with  the  nations 
pursuing  policies  so  selfish  that  they  led  to  the  Great 
War  —  what  were  the}^  doing,  communing  comforta- 
bly with  God  in  their  closets,  when  every  ounce  of 
their  effort  was  so  sorely  needed  for  the  solving  of 
these  intricate  problems,  the  steering  of  the  world 
into  a  really  Christian  order? 

This  purely  personal  piety  was  but  an  emasculated 
form  of  the  original  Christian  impulse.  Even  before 
the  coming  of  Christ,  the  great  tidal  wave  of  religious 
reform  of  which  his  preaching  was  the  crest  had  beat 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  45 

hard  against  the  social  evils  of  the  day.  Isaiah  had 
summoned  men  to  "  seek  justice,  relieve  the  op- 
pressed; secure  justice  for  the  orphaned,  and  plead 
for  the  widow/^  Elijah,  Amos,  Micah  are  outstand- 
ing examples  of  passionate  espousal  of  the  rights  of 
the  helpless.  John  the  Baptist,  when  the  multitudes 
asked  him,  saying,  "What  then  must  we  do?"  an- 
swered and  said  unto  them,  "  He  that  hath  two  coats, 
let  him  impart  to  him  that  hath  none;  and  he  that 
hath  food,  let  him  do  likewise."  And  to  the  pub- 
licans, "  Extort  no  more  than  that  which  is  appointed 
you."  An  appeal  for  the  spirit  of  social  service  and 
social  justice. 

Mr.  Louis  Wallis  has,  as  clearly  as  any  one,  shown 
this  to  be  the  leading  motif  of  the  prophetic  move- 
ment in  Israel.  "  The  failure  of  the  Church  to  ad- 
vocate the  full  Gospel  of  the  Bible  was  involved  in  a 
deep  misunderstanding  of  Hebrew  history  and  an  al- 
most total  misapprehension  of  that  mighty  religious 
warfare  which,  after  prolonged  struggles,  elevated 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  to  supremacy  and  overthrew 
the  cults  of  Baal  and  other  heathen  gods.  This  great 
conflict,  which  reverberates  through  the  Bible,  and 
thunders  out  from  Hebrew  history  across  the  ages, 
has  been  interpreted  by  the  church  as  a  theological 
dispute.  .  .  .  [But]  the  real  significance  of  the  con- 
flict between  Jehovah  and  the  Baals  is  not  that  of  a 
theological  warfare,  but  that  of  a  struggle  between 
justice  and  injustice  in  the  common  life  of  men.  This 
tremendous  fact  has  been  obscured  by  the  churchly 
emphasis  upon  theological  dogma. 

"  The  books  of  Judges  and  Samuel  show  us  that 
the  Hebrew  nation  of  biblical  times  came  into  exist- 
ence at  the  point  of  intermarriage  and  assimilation 
between   two  earlier,   parent  races  —  the  Israelites 


46  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

from  the  desert  of  Arabia,  and  the  i^morites  of 
Canaan.  The  Israelites,  like  all  wandering,  unset- 
tled peoples,  believed  in  common  rights  to  land,  de- 
mocracy, justice  and  brotherhood;  while  the  Amorites 
practised  the  contrary  system  of  land  monopoly,  aris- 
tocracy, slavery  and  graft.  The  one  system  of  life 
was  represented  by  the  worship  of  Jehovah ;  the  other 
by  the  cult  of  Baal. 

"When  these  tw^o  parent  races  combined  so  as  to 
produce  the  Hebrew^  nation,  the  worships  of  Jehovah 
and  of  the  Baals,  together  with  the  social  ideas  and 
tendencies  characteristic  of  each,  continued  to  stand. 
Society  was  presently  divided  into  the  rich  and  poor, 
the  grafters  and  the  oppressed.  The  unjust  customs 
of  the  Amorite  Baal  system  began  to  crowd  out  the 
more  humane  customs  identified  with  the  ancient 
Jehovah  system  of  the  Arabian  wilderness.  The  up- 
rising of  the  people  under  the  lead  of  the  prophets 
was  fundamentally  a  struggle  on  behalf  of  justice 
against  injustice.  It  was  not  a  theological  conflict 
in  the  modern  sense  at  all." 

That  this  social  interest  was  predominant  in  Jesus 
needs  no  laboring.  The  test  w^hich  was  to  decide  who 
should  inherit  the  Kingdom  was  the  test  of  service; 
it  should  be  they  to  whom  the  Messiah  could  say,  "  I 
was  an  hungered  and  ye  gave  me  meat ;  I  was  thirsty, 
and  ye  gave  me  drink ;  I  w^as  a  stranger  and  ye  took 
me  in,  naked  and  ye  clothed  me;  I  was  sick  and  ye 
visited  me,  I  was  in  prison  and  ye  came  unto  me.  .  .  . 
[For]  inasmuch  as  ye  have  done  it  unto  one  of  the 
least  of  these  my  brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me." 

The  early  Christians  went  about,  as  Jesus  had  done, 
helping  the  sick  and  the  suffering,  not  scorning  the 
weak  and  the  unfortunate,  as  the  pagan  world  had 
done,  but  holding  out  to  them  the  hand  of  sympathy. 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  47 

The  income  of  the  early  Church  went  not  for  the 
building  of  fine  edifices,  or  for  music,  but  for  fraternal 
help,  for  almsgiving,  support  of  the  ill  and  infirm, 
widows  and  orphans,  and  those  visited  by  calamities. 
Rich  men  handed  over  their  property  to  the  Church 
to  use;  and  this  mutual  helpfulness  was  one  of  the 
leading  causes  of  the  rapid  spread  of  Christianity. 

But  the  Church  soon  drifted  away  from  this  ideal, 
and  became  almost  wholly  otherworldly,  suffering 
that  things  should  go  from  bad  to  worse  here,  for 
soon  the  Lord  would  appear  to  establish  his  Kingdom. 
Its  one  task  came  to  be  to  convert  the  individual,  to 
rescue  him  out  of  a  wrecked  and  ruined  world.  The 
personal  sins  were  sharply  castigated.  But  the  so- 
cial and  political  injustices,  that  had  been  in  the  fore- 
ground of  the  preaching  of  the  prophets,  were  rele- 
gated to  the  concern  of  worldlings. 

Nietzsche  was  not  without  justification  when  he 
said  that  the  Christian  ideal  is  harmful  because  it 
offers  a  redemption  from  reality,  not  a  redemption  of 
reality.  By  putting  off  the  ideal  human  life  into  an- 
other world,  the  Church  ceased  to  care  so  much  about 
realizing  that  ideal  in  this  world.  There  came  to  be 
in  the  minds  of  Christians  what  the  psychologists  call 
a  dissociation.  Heaven  was  the  vision  of  the  soul's 
desire ;  but  it  was  a  repressed  desire,  that  found  little 
outlet  in  conduct.  It  was,  indeed,  a  great  service  to 
keep  the  ideal  alive,  during  the  centuries  when  its 
mundane  realization  was  thwarted  by  too  powerful 
forces.  But  now  that  its  approximate  realization  is 
coming  to  be  a  matter  not  so  hopelessly  inpracticable, 
it  is  high  time  to  utilize  the  allegiance  to  that  ideal 
life  so  long  cherished  as  a  dream  by  Christian  people, 
to  wed  theory  and  practice. 

The  various  socialistic  and  communistic  movements 


48  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

have  taken  up  the  task,  which  the  Church  should  have 
assumed,  of  bringing  in  the  age  of  Social  Justice. 
Rejected  and  condemned  by  the  Church,  they  have  in 
turn  scorned  the  Church,  for  the  most  part,  have  be- 
come materialistic  and  unspiritual.  On  the  other 
hand,  Christianity  has  remained  too  largely  unprac- 
tical and  ineffective.  It  is  a  matter  for  tears  that 
these  two  great  movements  of  the  human  spirit  should 
have  thus  misunderstood  and  antagonized  each  other, 
grown  one-sided  and  narrow.  The  Church  should 
have  made  socialism  unnecessary. 

But  it  is  not  too  late  for  the  Church  to  wake  up 
and  utilize  all  the  means  at  hand  for  redeeming  the 
world.  As  Charles  Stelzle  says,  "  The  only  way  to 
beat  socialism  is  to  beat  it  to  it."  The  Church  can 
not  be  neutral  in  the  struggle  now  on  between  en- 
trenched privilege  and  human  need.  That  struggle 
will  not  end  now  until  we  have  worked  out  a  juster 
and  humaner  industrial  and  political  order.  For  the 
Church  to  sit  b}^  and  take  no  leading  part  in  this 
struggle  is  for  it  to  deny  its  Lord,  and  to  lose  its  last 
opportunity  of  becoming  the  spiritual  guide  and  in- 
spiration of  the  world  at  large. 

Individualism  in  religion  is  correlative  to  the  indi- 
vidualism in  political  and  economic  affairs,  which  is 
now  so  generally  discredited.  Industry  was  con- 
ceived by  the  Manchester  School  as  a  matter  of  in- 
dividual contract  between  master  and  man.  Politics 
has  been  hitherto  a  matter  of  struggle  between  sharply 
separate  nations.  Religion  was,  to  the  author  of 
Pilgrim's  Progress,  and  is  to  many  preachers  to-day, 
a  relation  merely  between  the  individual  soul  and 
God.  This  conception  is  fostered  by  business  men 
and  jingoistic  politicians  who  wish  to  keep  religion 
from  interfering  with   their  profits  and  their  con- 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  49 

quests.  So  the  Church  has  become,  in  many  quarters, 
the  strongest  prop  to  the  status  quo;  it  has  preached 
that  poverty  *s  God-ordained,  and  that  economic 
servility  is  being  content  with  the  state  to  which  we 
have  been  called.     One  of  the  church-hymns  declares : 

"  The  rich  man  in  his  castle, 
The  poor  man  at  his  gate, 
God  made  them  high  or  lowly, 
And  ordered  their  estate." 

It  is  hardly  an  exaggeration,  then,  when  Bernard 
Shaw  writes :  "  The  religious  bodies  .  .  .  are  a  sort 
of  auxiliary  police,  taking  off  the  insurrectionary 
edge  of  poverty  with  coals  and  blankets,  bread  and 
treacle,  and  soothing  and  cheering  the  victims  with 
the  hopes  of  immense  and  inexpensive  happiness  in 
another  world,  when  the  process  of  working  them  to 
death  in  the  service  of  the  rich  is  complete  in  this.'' 

In  connection  with  the  Interchurch  campaign  for 
vast  sums  of  money  for  the  churches,  a  writer  in  The 
Freeman  for  May  26,  1920,  asks  :  ^'  Are  the  American 
churches  qualified  to  execute  such  a  trust  as  they 
are  now  seeking  to  take  upon  themselves?  Do  they 
know  actually  what  social  justice  is,  and  what  its 
practical  implications  are?  The  relation  of  the 
churches  to  the  workers  is  not  exactly  a  close  one, 
and  the  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  The  masses  are 
awakening  to  the  fact  that  in  their  struggle  to  wrest 
concessions  from  the  grudging  hand  of  privilege,  the 
Church  is  pretty  generally  to  be  found  against  them. 
Their  efforts  have  been  and  are  denounced  from  the 
pulpit  nine  times  to  once  where  they  have  been  sup- 
ported. Not  unnaturally,  therefore,  they  are  coming 
to  distrust  the  churches." 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  significant  that  representa- 


50  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

tives  of  the  upper  classes  —  the  classes,  that  is,  that 
are  well  off  under  existing  social  arrangements  —  are 
often  staunch  supporters  of  the  Church  for  the  ex- 
plicit and  avowed  reason  that  it  is  the  greatest  force 
for  the  maintenance  of  things  as  they  are.  For  ex- 
ample, Eoger  Babson,  well-known  expert  on  the  stock- 
market,  writes  in  one  of  his  bulletins  to  his  clients, 
dated  January  27,  1920 :  "  The  value  of  our  invest- 
ments depends  not  on  the  strength  of  our  banks,  but 
rather  upon  the  strength  of  our  churches.  The  un- 
derpaid preachers  of  the  nation  are  the  men  upon 
whom  we  really  are  depending  rather  than  the  well- 
paid  lawyers,  bankers  and  brokers.  The  religion  of 
the  community  is  really  the  bulwark  of  our  invest- 
ments. And  when  we  consider  that  only  15%  of  the 
people  hold  securities  of  any  kind  and  less  than  3% 
hold  enough  to  pay  an  income  tax,  the  importance  of 
the  churches  becomes  even  more  evident. 

"  For  our  own  sakes,  for  our  children's  sakes,  for 
the  nation's  sake,  let  us  business  men  get  behind  the 
churches  and  their  preachers!  Never  mind  if  they 
are  not  perfect,  never  mind  if  their  theology  is  out  of 
date.  This  only  means  that  were  they  efficient  they 
would  do  very  much  more.  The  safety  of  all  we 
have  is  due  to  the  churches,  even  in  their  present  in- 
efficient and  inactive  state.  By  all  that  we  hold  dear, 
let  us  from  this  very  day  give  more  time,  money  and 
thought  to  the  churches  of  our  city,  for  upon  these  the 
value  of  all  we  own  ultimately  depends  I  " 

The  God  of  things  as  they  are !  Is  that  the  Chris- 
tian God?  Surely  we,  who  have  had  another  vision 
set  before  us,  a  vision  of  a  world  of  real  brotherhood 
for  all  —  surely  we  Christians  can  never  be  content 
with  any  social  order  such  as  ours.  It  is  profoundly 
true  that  no  social  structure  that  can  be  devised  wiU 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  51 

be  ideal  unless  the  men  and  women  who  live  under  it 
have  the  spirit  of  brotherliness  in  their  hearts.  But 
it  is  equally  true  —  and  a  far  more  important  truth 
for  the  churches  to  recognize  just  now  —  that  it  is 
going  to  be  impossible  to  bring  about  the  millennium 
through  mere  preaching  and  persuasion;  it  is  not 
enough  to  soothe  men  by  saying  "  The  Kingdom  of 
God  is  within  you." 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  that  text  is  undoubtedly  a  mis- 
translation —  although  the  Greek  words,  in  them- 
selves, are  ambiguous.  Jesus  would  not  have  told 
the  Pharisees,  to  whom  he  was  talking,  that  the  King- 
dom w^as  within  them!  The  context,  moreover, 
shows  plainly  that  the  actual  meaning  was :  "  The 
Kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  with  observation  (i.  e. 
not  so  gradually  that  you  can  watch  it  coming),  but 
behold!  (before  you  realize  that  it  is  coming)  the 
Kingdom  of  God  is  (all  of  a  sudden)  in  your  midst!  " 
This  belief  in  the  suddenness  of  its  coming,  which  is 
expressed  in  many  other  passages,  we  must  discard. 
But  the  important  point  for  us  is  that  this  passage, 
when  rightly  understood,  reinforces  rather  than  con- 
tradicts the  other  passages  which  make  clear  that  the 
Kingdom  is  to  be  a  social  affair,  expressing  itself  not 
only  in  cleansed  hearts  but  also  in  an  outward  Chris- 
tian order.  The  Kingdom  of  God  (or,  to  use  modern 
phraseology,  the  Christian  Social  Order)  will  only 
come  if  we  work  for  its  coming.  But  it  will  come  if 
we  work  for  it.  We  can  have,  if  we  will,  a  reign  of 
justice  and  righteousness  on  this  earth,  here  and 
soon. 

The  Church,  then,  must  stop  thinking  so  much  of 
itself,  its  numbers  and  importance,  and  must  think 
more  of  the  world.  It  is  its  task  to  secure  the  em- 
bodiment of  the  ideals  of  Jesus  in  our  institutions  — 


52  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

which  is  the  only  way  out  of  the  misery  and  confusion 
in  which  civilization  still  flounders.  There  is  a  grave 
dissatisfaction  with  Christianity  abroad.  It  did  not 
avert  the  Great  War,  it  has  not  solved  the  problems 
of  poverty,  of  distributive  justice,  of  political  cor- 
ruption and  international  quarrelsomeness.  What 
has  been  the  good  of  it?  This  wonderful  dynamic, 
arousing  men's  emotions,  kindling  their  wills  —  can 
we  not  harness  it  up  better  to  practical  service?  It 
is  often  held  to-day  that  preaching  that  deals  with 
political  or  industrial  problems  —  the  big  moral  is- 
sues of  the  day  —  is  "  secular ''  and  "  unspiritual." 
It  used  to  be  thought,  indeed,  that  worldly  posses- 
sions, an  interest  in  art  or  politics,  marriage,  even 
cleanliness,  were  incompatible  with  spirituality. 
Pious  people  went  apart,  became  hermits,  monks, 
nuns,  ceased  to  count  in  the  great  struggle  for  the 
betterment  of  human  life.  Not  so  shall  the  struggle 
be  won.  Every  Christian  should  have  —  not  a  great 
part  in  this  struggle,  but  some  part  in  this  great 
struggle.  Every  Christian  should  really  mean  what 
he  says  when  he  prays,  "  Thy  Kingdom  come  on  earth 
as  it  is  in  Heaven ! '' 

This  trumpet  call  of  the  social  gospel  is  what  will 
save  the  Church.  Many  churches  that  have  re- 
sponded to  it  have  found  their  membership  doubled 
and  their  spiritual  life  quadrupled.  Those  organiza- 
tions —  like  the  Y.  M.  C.  A. —  which  emphasize  most 
the  social  ideal  are  growing  most  rapidly.  Most  of 
our  denominations  now  have  Social  Service  depart- 
ments ;  platforms  advocating  needed  social  legislation 
have  been  adopted  by  many  church  conferences.  The 
Federal  Council  of  Churches  has  a  Commission  on  the 
Church  and  Social  Service,  which  is  active  in  stimu- 
lating these  interests  among  its  component  members. 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  53 

In  many  towns  and  cities  vigorous  campaigns  for 
social  advance  have  been  carried  on  by  the  united 
churches.  Theological  schools  are  giving  more  and 
more  courses  in  "  practical  Christianity."  What  Dr. 
George  Gordon  recently  wrote  is  becoming  every  year 
truer :  "  American  religion  is  war  against  evil  to  the 
knife,  and  the  knife  to  the  hilt." 

Among  the  many  concrete  applications  of  the  So- 
cial Gospel,  we  may  mention  first  the  battle  against 
bad  living  conditions,  ill-health,  undernourishment, 
and  all  the  evils  of  poverty.  As  Mr.  Lloyd  George 
declared,  in  a  recent  speech,  "  The  churches  ought  to 
be  like  a  search-light  turned  on  all  slums,  to  expose, 
to  shame  those  in  authority  into  doing  something." 
Just  as  the  early  church  fought  against  and  destroyed 
the  Gladiatorial  Contests,  so  the  contemporary 
church  should  attack  and  abolish  the  inhumanities 
of  our  twentieth  century  civilization. 

The  early  church,  of  course,  practised  physical 
healing,  as  Jesus  had  done.  The  Christian  Science 
Church  is  emphasizing  that  activity  to-day,  and  it  has 
been  taken  up  with  success  by  a  number  of  individual 
churches  in  the  other  denominations,  for  example,  by 
the  Emmanuel  Church  in  Boston.  There  seems  to  be 
in  this  a  great  potentiality  of  good.  But  there  are 
also  dangers.  To  undertake  this  delicate  matter 
without,  on  occasion,  doing  grave  harm,  requires  ex- 
pert skill.  The  average  minister  has,  of  course,  no 
time  either  for  the  requisite  training  or  the  work 
itself.  And  most  church-workers  at  it  would  inevita- 
bly be  amateurish  and  blundering.  This  is  the  age 
of  specialists;  and  it  seems  wisest,  on  the  whole,  to 
leave  physical  healing  to  those  whose  profession  it  is. 
Certainly  mental  healing,  whether  practised  by  a 
minister  or  by  a  physician,  should  go  hand  in  hand 


54  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

with  the  other  approved  methods  known  to  the  pro- 
fession. If  a  church,  by  offering  to  heal,  disparages 
these  other  methods,  and  leads  people  to  neglect  them 
when  needed,  it  will  be  responsible  on  occasion  for 
much  suffering  and  even  for  premature  deaths.  And 
if  it  uses  the  successful  results  of  its  healing  to  sus- 
tain an  irrational  philosophy,  it  is,  in  another  way, 
doing  harm  to  society. 

The  Church  will  always  extend  its  hand  of  service 
to  the  sick  and  the  dying,  will  seek  to  alleviate  the 
suffering  in  the  world.  But  after  all,  as  was  said  of 
the  famous  charge  of  the  Light  Brigade,  that  is  mag- 
nificent, but  it  is  not  war.  It  is  ivar  when  the  Church 
attacks  the  causes  of  poverty,  suffering,  and  disease. 
Instead  of  being  content  to  patch  up  the  rents,  to 
staunch  the  wounds  inflicted  by  our  cruel  social  or- 
der, the  Church  must  seek  to  regenerate  the  system 
that  produces  them.  It  must  help  so  to  alter  our 
political  machinery  as  to  make  graft  more  difficult 
and  to  attract  honest  and  able  men  into  politics.  It 
must  keep  before  our  people  the  ideal  of  a  true  de- 
mocracy, not  as  something  yet  attained  but  as  some- 
thing to  work  toward  with  utmost  endeavor.  It  must 
stand  hard  against  all  violence  and  lawlessness,  and 
at  the  same  time  work  for  the  uprooting  of  the  wrongs 
that  engender  unrest  and  class  conflicts.  The  right 
of  free  speech  must  be  staunchly  upheld,  as  a  funda- 
mental human  right,  and  the  essential  precondition 
of  the  spread  of  new  and  valuable  ideas. 

Above  all,  the  Church  should  lend  its  aid  to  the 
campaign  for  a  juster  distribution  of  wealth.  Amer- 
ica is  known  abroad  as  the  land  of  plutocracy;  one 
per  cent  of  our  families  get  about  fifteen  per  cent  of 
the  total  national  income,  while  the  lowest  ten  or 
twenty  per  cent  have  less  than  enough  to  keep  them- 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  55 

selves  in  decent  physical  condition.  The  annual  in- 
come of  our  richest  men  is  equal  to  that  of  a  hundred 
thousand  or  so  of  our  poorest-paid  laborers ;  if  Adam 
had  been  working  since  his  supposed  advent  some 
six  thousand  years  ago,  at  a  wage  of  thirty  dollars  a 
week,  he  would  have  earned  in  all  this  time  less  than 
some  of  these  multi-millionaires  receive  in  a  year. 

Moreover,  conditions  are  getting  worse  instead  of 
better.  The  cost  of  living  has  risen  so  fast  that  the 
poorer  classes,  as  a  whole  —  in  spite  of  some  striking 
exceptions  —  are  getting,  in  terms  of  purchasing 
power,  less  than  a  decade  ago ;  while  the  rich  are  get- 
ting richer  by  leaps  and  bounds,  and  the  number  of 
millionaires  is  rapidly  increasing.  Business  pros- 
perity benefits  the  rich  more  than  it  benefits  the  poor ; 
for  example,  the  United  States  Steel  Corporation,  for 
every  dollar  that  it  paid  to  employees  in  1913  paid 
11.27  in  1916 ;  for  every  dollar  that  it  paid  to  stock- 
holders in  1913  it  paid  |3.34  in  1916. 

But  our  failure  to  work  out  a  plan  in  even  moderate 
degree  approaching  distributive  justice  is  a  common- 
place ;  the  point  to  be  here  emphasized  is  that  this  is 
a  legitimate  and  important  concern  of  the  Church. 
The  attitude  that  despises  these  worldly  interests  will 
no  longer  do.  Equally  by  grinding  poverty  and  by 
superfiuous  riches  is  the  spiritual  life  starved ;  and  no 
one  can  call  a  community  Christian  wherein  a  part 
are  suffering  for  the  lack  of  what  another  part  could 
easily  spare.  Distributive  justice,  or  something  more 
nearly  approaching  it,  is  bound  to  come ;  the  question 
is  whether  the  Church  is  to  be  in  the  van  or  in  the 
rear  of  the  movement  that  brings  it  into  being. 

The  Church  must  pander  to  no  rich  pewholders,  it 
must  spare  no  private  or  public  corruption,  it  must 
fight  with  all  its  might  against  the  laxity,  the  money- 


56  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

worship,  the  extravagance  and  luxury  of  this  pros- 
perous age;  it  must  refuse  to  compromise  with  the 
world,  it  must  boldly  denounce  wrongs  of  any  sort, 
wherever  found,  especially  those  wrongs  which  are 
not  curable  by  law  alone  but  need  the  force  of  a 
strong  public  opinion  to  eradicate. 

There  are,  indeed,  some  social  conflicts  with  regard 
to  which  the  Church  must  not  take  sides,  because  it  is 
impossible  for  men  who  are  not  thoroughly  conversant 
with  the  concrete  situations  to  know  for  certain  where 
the  truth  or  justice  lies.  As  Dr.  C.  E.  Jefferson 
writes,  "  Preachers  do  not  make  haste  to  lift  up  their 
voices  as  umpires  and  judges  in  industrial  disputes, 
because  they  do  not  feel  competent  to  pass  judgment 
on  these  intricate  matters.  Disputes  between  men 
are  nearly  always  complicated.  So  much  dust  is 
kicked  up,  it  is  difficult  to  see  clearly.  There  is 
usually  justice  on  both  sides,  and  wrong  on  both  sides. 
Both  sides  are  more  or  less  selfish,  and  more  or  less 
dominated  by  passion,  and  the  situation  gets  into  a 
snarl  because  of  the  lack  of  considerateness  and  pa- 
tience and  good  feeling  on  both  sides.  Moreover,  the 
air  becomes  filled  with  rumors  and  gossip  and  imagin- 
ings, so  that  it  is  well-nigh  impossible  to  know  what 
to  believe.  To  pass  an  equitable  judgment  therefore 
is  far  from  easy.  There  must  be  a  thorough  investi- 
gation. A  huge  mass  of  testimony  must  be  sifted  in 
order  to  arrive  at  data  on  which  a  valid  conclusion 
can  be  built.  Now,  incredible  though  it  seems,  a 
clergyman  is  one  of  the  busiest  men  in  the  community. 
There  is  no  eight-hour  day  for  him.  His  parish  duties 
are  exacting  and  exhausting,  and  he  has  no  time  to 
make  the  investigation  which  would  give  him  a  right 
to  set  himself  up  as  a  judge  in  industrial  quarrels.'' 

But  there  are  many  social  sins  with  regard  to  which 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  57 

the  Church  has  been  far  too  acquiescent.  The  sins, 
for  example,  that  we  label  by  the  term  "  profiteer- 
ing." Food  speculation  which  raises  prices,  for  the 
sake  of  private  profit,  when  people  are  starving  or 
sacrificing  much  to  buy  what  they  must  have  to  live. 
Ruining  competitors,  or  buying  them  out  by  threat 
of  ruin,  and  then  raising  the  price  of  the  product 
sold.  Making  money  on  the  stock  market  through 
artificial  manipulation  of  stocks.  Using  inside  in- 
formation to  make  money  in  stocks,  in  real  estate,  or 
elsewhere.  Watering  stocks,  overpaying  salaries,  and 
other  directoral  abuses  and  unscrupulous  forms  of 
financiering.  Adulteration,  underweight,  untruthful 
advertisements,  patent  medicine  frauds,  and  other 
forms  of  business  dishonesty.  Why  is  the  Church  so 
timid  in  the  presence  of  these  wrongs? 

Or  take  sins  against  employees :  The  employment 
of  children,  who  should  be  at  school  or  at  play ;  over- 
long  hours  of  work ;  unsanitary  places  for  work ;  wages 
too  low  to  allow  a  decent  standard  of  living ;  callous- 
ness to  accidents  which  could  easily  be  prevented  — 
because  it  is  cheaper  to  pay  the  bills  than  to  invest  in 
the  available  safeguards.  In  the  campaign  against 
such  wrongs  the  Church  must  assume  moral  leader- 
ship. 

Unhappily,  the  Protestant  churches  in  this  country 
are  mainly  churches  of  the  upper  classes,  dependent 
for  their  policy  upon  the  opinions  of  upper-class  men 
and  women,  and  for  support  upon  their  pocket-books. 
They  have  an  unconscious  bias  against  radicalism; 
they  are  too  often,  as  Mr.  Lowes  Dickinson  says, 
"  Counsel  retained  for  the  present  order."  In  many 
of  these  wealthier  churches  the  social  emphasis  has 
been  bitterly  opposed.  A  recent  number  of  one  of  our 
leading  religious  periodicals  contains  the  following 


58  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

statement  from  a  Christian  minister:  "I  maintain 
it  is  not  possible  to  preach  the  gospel  of  God's  uni- 
versal fatherhood  and  man's  brotherhood  with  its  im- 
plications applied  to  business,  and  industry,  and  pol- 
itics, in  the  wealthier  churches,  and  even  in  some  of 
those  without  much  wealth,  without  inviting  the  ac- 
tive opposition  of  men  in  the  churches.  I  made  this 
statement  not  long  ago  to  a  prominent  religious  jour- 
nalist and  this  is  what  he  said :  ^  You  are  right ;  the 
wealthier  churches  don't  want  the  social  gospel.' 
Not  in  twenty  years  have  I  held  a  pastorate  in  which 
this  was  not  seriously  true." 

However  widely  true  this  may  be,  it  is  held  as  true 
by  masses  of  the  poorer  people.  These  "  alienated 
masses  "  will  never  be  reached  by  the  Church  while 
this  suspicion  is  abroad.  As  Mr.  Rockefeller  points 
out,  they  "  regard  the  Church  as  the  abode  of  the 
^  Better-than-thous,'  an  organization  in  which  men 
and  women  are  gathered  who  profess  one  thing  and 
from  which  they  go  out  to  live  another.  It  is,  from 
their  viewpoint,  an  institution  which  has  little  sym- 
pathy with  them  or  understanding  of  their  prob- 
lems." 

The  Church  should  be  the  reconciler  of  classes,  the 
preventative  of  social  rifts  and  class  wars.  It  must 
learn  to  sympathize  with  the  poor  and  lowly,  as  Jesus 
did.  There  is  a  deep  hunger  for  religion  among  these 
unchurched  masses.  But  the  Church  must  show  that 
it  is  out  to  help  them,  that  it  welcomes  their  free 
criticism  and  suggestion,  and  is  not  committed  to  the 
social  philosophy  of  the  well-to-do. 

The  Church  should,  finally,  be  the  reconciler,  like- 
wise, of  nations.  Undoubtedly,  some  sort  of  a  League 
of  Nations  is  the  hope  of  the  world.  But  how 
great  a  leap  forward  will  statesmen  dare  to  take? 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  59 

And  whatever  plan  they  try  to  put  into  operation,  will 
it  work?  The  answer  to  these  questions  depends 
upon  the  state  of  mind  of  the  people  of  the  nations 
that  are  to  be  federated.  It  is  not  exclusively  a  prob- 
lem for  statesmen  and  students  of  international  law, 
though  their  expert  services  will  be  needed.  It  is  in 
even  greater  degree  a  problem  for  the  moralists,  the 
educators,  the  editors  and  preachers,  and  all  who  can 
help  mould  the  minds  of  men.  For  difficult  as  it  will 
be  to  develop  a  just  and  workable  system  of  inter- 
national law  and  administration,  that  difficulty  is  as 
nothing  to  that  of  persuading  the  people  of  the  com- 
ponent nations  to  give  that  loyal  allegiance  to  this 
new  authority  which  alone  can  transform  it  from  a 
paper  plan  into  a  working  system. 

For  the  crucial  fact  is  this :  the  acceptance  of  any 
supernational  authority  will  involve  sacrifice;  some- 
times material  sacrifice,  sometimes  sacrifice  of  pres- 
tige or  supposed  "  honor,''  of  national  aspirations  and 
expectations.  Certainly  the  advantages  gained  will 
far  outweigh  the  sacrifices.  But  that  is  the  case  with 
all  morality,  and  yet  morality  by  no  means  easily  pre- 
vails over  the  selfishness  and  shortsightedness  of 
men's  hearts.  Into  the  field  of  politics  and  economic 
rivalry  morality  has  scarcely  begun  to  penetrate, — 
its  conquest  of  this  great  field  will  at  best  be  patheti- 
cally slow.  So  the  one  outstanding  and  obvious  duty 
of  the  hour  is  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  working  of 
the  League,  to  make  its  paths  straight.  Every  church 
should  be  mobilized,  to  awaken  and  mould  the  temper 
which  alone  can  sustain  an  organized,  enforced,  and 
lasting  justice  and  peace. 

We  must  combat,  by  might  and  main,  that  vague 
optimism  that  expects  things  to  come  out  all  right 
if  they  are  let  alone.     And,  on  the  other  hand,  we 


60  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

must  combat  the  pessimism  which  looks  upon  any 
hope  of  an  altered  world  as  naive  and  illusory.  Our 
ideal  can  be  realized.  But  a  sense  of  its  worth,  and 
our  imperious  need  of  it,  are  not  the  only  psychologi- 
cal prerequisites  to  its  realization.  We  must  trans- 
late that  ideal  into  concrete  attitudes  and  sacrifices 
for  everyday  use.  We  must  be  willing,  not  only  in 
the  abstract,  but  with  reference  to  each  particular 
case,  to  see  the  general  interest  of  mankind  prevail 
over  our  own  national  desire.  We  must  loyally  abide 
by  the  majority  decision  of  the  supernational  tribu- 
nal, even  if  we'feel  it  to  be  unjust  or  mistaken.  We 
must  care  more  for  the  welfare  of  the  world  than  for 
the  welfare  of  America  —  just  as  we  now  care  more 
(or  ought  to  care  more)  for  the  welfare  of  America 
than  for  the  welfare  of  New  York  or  Illinois.  In 
short,  what  the  world  needs  is  a  genuine  acceptance 
of  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Man. 
It  is  up  to  the  churches  to  see  to  it  that  their  mem- 
bers, at  least,  realize  the  full  implications  of  that 
doctrine  and  are  loyal  to  them. 

The  social  work  of  the  Church  is,  thus,  something 
for  more  serious  than  it  is  often  taken  to  be.  Some 
churches  seem  to  be  becoming  little  more  than  jovial 
meeting  places  for  sociables  and  entertainments,  with 
a  Sunday  service  thrown  in,  a  service  that  has  an  ex- 
cellent choir  and  a  bright  talk  on  matters  of  the  day. 
Some  modern  church-buildings  have  departed  from 
that  style  of  architecture  and  decoration  which  long 
association  or  some  innate  relationship  has  made  ex- 
pressive of  the  religious  mood,  and  make  an  appeal 
to  the  eye  and  imagination  scarcely  different  from 
that  of  theatre  or  concert-hall.  When  a  church  de- 
generates to  the  point  of  being  a  sort  of  social  club 
or  tea-party,  pleasant  and  useful  as  that  social  func- 


CHRISTIANIZING  THE  COMMUNITY  61 

tion  may  be,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  men  who 
are  looking  for  light  and  inspiration  for  service  stay 
in  their  libraries  or  go  out  and  look  up  to  the  hills  for 
their  strength. 

Some  of  the  churches  are  still  saying,  This  is  not 
our  dut}^,  there  are  other  agencies;  we  are  not  our 
brothers'  keepers.  The  answer  to  them  is,  first,  that 
these  wrongs  are  not  being  widely  enough  or  rapidly 
enough  righted  by  other  agencies,  and  secondly,  that 
the  Church  is  not  true  to  its  mission  unless  it  is  do- 
ing its  share,  and  that  a  leading  share,  in  the  effort. 
The  Church  may  well  be  content  to  see  much  of  what 
needs  to  be  done  undertaken  by  other  agencies.  But 
it  must  always  remain  at  least  a  power-house,  to  gen- 
erate the  spirit  of  service;  and  a  clearing-house  for 
service,  a  place  where  people  shall  learn  how  and 
where  to  serve.  As  Shailer  Mathews  says,  the  Church 
must  give  "  manual  training  in  altruism."  By  so  do- 
ing it  will  appeal  not  so  much  to  the  self-seekers,  who 
want  to  be  ^'  saved,"  as  to  those  of  a  finer  fibre,  who 
want  to  help  save  the  world. 


CHAPTER  SIX 

ENCOURAGING    FREE   THOUGHT 

We  turn  now  to  consider  the  Educational  Mission 
of  the  Church.  We  have  already  suggested  the 
danger  to  which  she  has  so  often  succumbed,  of  teach- 
ing a  certain  set  of  doctrines  as  the  ultimate  truth, 
and  closing  men's  minds  to  contrary  opinions.  By 
contrast  with  that  common  attitude,  it  may  be  said  at 
once  that  the  duty  of  the  Church,  as  of  every  human 
Institution,  is  to  encourage  the  freest  possible  thought. 
No  field  must  be  immune  from  the  cleansing  and  in- 
vigorating power  of  this  thought-activity.  Tradi- 
tional view^s  of  God,  of  Christ,  of  the  Bible  —  all 
should  be  studied  by  the  present  generation,  with 
reverence  but  without  awe,  or  any  sense  of  loyalty 
except  such  as  their  apparent  reasonableness  and  con- 
sonance with  our  experience  commands.  Whenever 
any  received  opinion  seems  doubtful  to  any  one,  he 
should  be  not  only  not  rebuked,  but  encouraged  openly 
and  frankly  to  show  his  reasons  for  dissent.  In  short, 
our  loyalty  should  be  to  nothing  but  the  truth,  what- 
ever that  may  turn  out  to  be. 

Of  course,  every  dogmatist  sincerely  believes  that 
he  has  the  truth.  But  which  dogmatist!  Here  are 
several  hundred  varieties  of  Christian  doctrine  —  not 
to  speak  of  all  the  non-Christian  views,  which  surely 
deserve  a  hearing.  Most  (or  all)  of  these  views  must 
obviously  be  at  least  partly  mistaken.  Moreover,  be- 
sides the  study  of  comparative  religion,  many  modern 

62 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  63 

investigations  —  Biblical  scholarship,  ancient  his- 
tory, geology,  biology,  philosophy  —  have  shaken 
men's  trust  in  views  once  confidently  held.  Observa- 
bly, the  Church  has  been  mistaken  in  the  past,  over 
and  over  again.  Can  we  be  sure  that  the  process  of 
pruning  and  correcting  and  revising  has  reached  its 
end  and  left  us  with  the  final  truth?  Many  men  in 
the  Church  who  in  their  youth  fought  hard  for  beliefs 
then  held  heretical  and  dangerous,  seem  to  look  upon 
that  struggle  as  the  last  reformation,  and  oppose  the 
radical  ideas  of  the  younger  generation  as  vigorously 
as  they  were,  in  their  day,  opposed. 

The  obvious  fact  is  that  the  Church  weakens  her 
position  by  committing  herself  to  any  fixed  view; 
every  attack  upon  that  view  becomes  then  an  attack 
upon  her,  and  the  advance  of  knowledge  is  continually 
putting  her  in  the  wrong.  These  matters  of  fact  are 
actually  irrelevant  to  the  ideals  which  the  Church 
exists  to  teach ;  and  by  entangling  herself  with  a  par- 
ticular historical  and  cosmological  view  she  has 
brought  needless  suspicion  and  discredit  upon  those 
ideals. 

The  dilemma  is  simple.  If  there  is  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  any  doctrine,  there  is  no  need  of  its  defence 
by  the  Church.  There  is  no  conspiracy  abroad 
against  any  particular  views;  and  just  as  we  do  not 
need  a  church  to  persuade  people  of  the  truth  of  evo- 
lution or  of  gravitation,  we  need  no  artificial  protec- 
tion for  the  truth  in  religion.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  evidence  for  the  doctrine  in  question  is  weak  and 
uncertain,  then  the  Church  has  no  moral  right  to 
teach  it  as  if  it  were  surely  the  truth  —  much  less  to 
frown  upon  those  who  venture  to  disbelieve  or  ques- 
tion it. 

Prejudice,  partisanship,  the  premature  arriving  at 


64  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

conclusions  —  these  are  among  the  greatest  dangers 
in  a  democracy.     And  they  are  deep-rooted  enough  in 
human  nature  without  being  deliberately  fostered  by 
the  Church.     One  of  the  most  notable  aspects  of  the 
human  mind  is  the  tendency  by  which,  once  started 
seeing  things  in  a  certain  way,  it  continues  to  see 
things  in  that  way,  and  becomes  blind  to  even  more 
obvious   facts   of  another  kind.     The   believer  goes 
about  wrapped  in  the  atmosphere  of  his  beliefs,  im- 
penetrable to  light  from  without,  seeing  only  his  own 
visions.     Catholic,     Protestant,     Jew,     Atheist,     go 
through  college  and  through  life,  surrounded  by  the 
same  facts  of  experience,  yet  each  seeing  only  those 
which  fit  his  particular  belief,  and  becoming  more 
and  more  confirmed  in  it ;  the  brain  once  set  in  given 
channels  usually  continues  to  follow  those  to  the  end. 
We  are  all  beset  by  a  chaos  of  impressions,  out  of 
which  we  select  those  which  easily  assimilate  them- 
selves with   our  previous  conceptions;  the  rest  we 
ignore.     Facts,  like  Bible  verses,  can  be  found  to  sup- 
port any  creed;  and  that  with  which  a  man  begins 
his  life  is  in  most  cases  that  with  which  he  ends  it. 
The  ideas  learned  in  childhood,  the  beliefs  of  par- 
ents and  friends,  the  mental  conceptions  of  the  forma- 
tive years,  are  usually  those  that  the  mature  man 
champions.     Few  can  rise  above  their  early  environ- 
ment;   unconsciously    it    colors    and    directs    their 
thought,  and  stamps  itself  ineradicably  upon  their 
minds.     The  faith  inherited  or  early  espoused,  the 
atmosphere  of  the  home,  the  lessons  learned  at  the 
mother's  knee,  affect  a  deeper  layer  of  consciousness 
than  that  reached  by  later  reasonings  and  doubts; 
however  the  latter  may  assail  the  "  proofs  "  of  that 
faith,  they  cannot  dislodge  the  faith  itself.     And  so 
it  is  that  in  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred,  the 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  65 

Catholic  remains  Catholic,  the  Protestant  remains 
Protestant,  the  Buddhist  remains  Buddhist,  the  Mo- 
hammedan remains  Mohammedan,  in  spite  of  all 
criticisms  or  contrary  experience.  The  "  proofs " 
that  satisfy  the  Christian  are  nonsense  to  the  Jew, 
those  that  satisfy  the  Jew  would  be  nonsense  to  the 
Buddhist;  but  each  is  content  with  the  cogency  of 
his  own.  Rare  is  the  man  who  is  willing  to  question 
old  beliefs  and  look  critically  at  his  faith,  to  ask 
himself  why  he  believes  as  he  does,  whether  he  is  not 
the  mere  product  of  early  training  and  environment, 
whether  he  has  contended  for  his  beliefs  rather  be- 
cause they  were  his  own  than  because  he  had  ever 
earnestly  studied  the  evidence  for  them,  whether  he 
has  cherished  them  because  they  were  precious  to  him 
rather  than  because  he  had  reason  to  believe  them 
true. 

When  a  man  who  has  been  reared  in  a  Christian 
atmosphere  does  philosophize  he  generally  either 
keeps  his  religion  in  a  separate  compartment  from 
his  philosophy,  becomes  a  free-thinker  in  his  intel- 
lectual hours  and  a  dogmatist  in  his  pious  moments ; 
or,  beset  by  the  need  of  harmonizing  the  conflicting 
elements  in  his  mind,  he  spends  his  thought  laboring 
to  prove  the  truth  of  his  creed,  which  at  all  costs  he 
will  cling  to.  Thus,  since  most  men  in  Europe  and 
America  have  been  reared  in  an  "  orthodox  ^^  atmos- 
phere, there  are  many  more  books  written  in  defence 
of  inherited  religious  ideas  than  in  the  spirit  of  free 
and  candid  inquiry.  Our  libraries  are  flooded  with 
works  which  gloss  over  the  adverse  facts  and  draw  the 
attention  to  those  which  are  favorable  to  accepted 
doctrines,  or  by  ingenious  and  subtle  argument  un- 
dermine the  obvious  deductions  from  those  adverse 
facts.     Each  new  writer  has  a  way  of  his  own  to 


QQ  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

escape  back  from  the  drift  of  experience  to  the  tradi- 
tional beliefs,  and  all  sorts  of  laborious  casuistries 
and  hazy  evasions  pass  current. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  impute  dishonesty  to  these 
writers;  convinced  as  they  are  that  their  beliefs  are 
true,  aye,  and  vitally,  immanently  important  to  man- 
kind, it  is  no  wonder  that  they  accept  any  argument, 
however  flimsy,  that  seems  to  sustain  them.  Who 
cares  to  criticize  arguments  that  make  for  what  he 
intensely  believes!  To  criticize  the  argument  would 
seem  like  doubting  the  belief. 

But  it  is  not  thus  that  truth  is  attained.  The  first 
step  in  any  approach  toward  that  elusive  goal  is  the 
spirit  of  open-mindedness.  For  this  reason  the  very 
concept  "  orthodoxy ''  is  presumptuous  and  illegiti- 
mate. The  "  orthodox  "  doctrine  is  simply,  of  course, 
the  majority  opinion  —  or  rather,  the  opinion  of  a 
few  leaders,  who  were  able  to  stamp  their  views,  by 
persuasion  or  by  more  questionable  methods,  upon  a 
particular  church.  Orthodoxies  hitherto  have  always 
been  mistaken,  have  always  been  transient;  and 
wherever  the  conception  of  "  orthodoxy "  has  been 
entertained,  there  has  been  a  distinct  brake  upon  in- 
tellectual progress.  Even  in  theology  itself  the  real 
progress  has  been  made  by  outsiders,  by  heretics,  ever 
since  the  period  when  the  thought  of  the  Church,  for 
a  long  time  fluid  and  changing,  crystallized  into  the 
first  orthodoxy. 

If  the  term  "  orthodoxy "  is  to  be  retained,  it 
should  be  to  mean  the  attitude  that  is  true  to  the 
spirit  of  Christ ;  and,  according  to  one  of  the  earliest 
of  his  Apostles,  "  Where  the  spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there 
is  liberty."  This  same  great  Apostle,  voicing  his  own 
ideal,  wrote  '^  For  why  is  my  liberty  judged  by  an- 
other's conscience?  "     If  this  is  the  genuinely  ortho- 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  6T 

dox  spirit,  and  heresy  is  wandering  from  that  spirit, 
our  current  ascriptions  of  these  terms  should  be  re- 
versed. The  so-called  orthodoxy  of  the  rigid  creeds, 
which  embalm  the  thought  of  the  theological  age,  is 
Augustinianism,  or  Calvinism,  or  what  not ;  it  is  not 
Christianity. 

The  "  conflict  of  science  and  religion  '' —  perhaps 
we  should  better  call  it  now  a  deadlock,  since  it  has 
lapsed  from  the  forefront  of  attention  —  has  con- 
sisted not  so  much  in  a  dispute  about  particular  facts 
as  in  a  fundamental  divergence  of  ideal.  The  true 
scientist  welcomes  criticism,  free  inquiry,  new  ideas; 
hopes  for  continual  progress  from  old  theories  to 
truer  ones ;  is  ready  to  discard  his  creed  whenever  he 
gets  fresh  light;  teaches  his  disciples  to  experiment 
for  themselves  and  work  out  so  far  as  possible  their 
own  conclusions.  The  Church,  on  the  other  hand, 
came  somehow  during  the  early  centuries  to  be  a  body 
of  people  who  —  though  for  the  most  part  very  ill 
qualified  to  judge  of  such  matters  —  had  committed 
themselves  to  a  certain  set  of  beliefs,  and  wished,  not 
a  free  and  candid  investigation  of  them,  but  an  un- 
questioning acceptance.  This  attitude  may  have 
been  advisable  in  the  early  period  of  the  life  of  the 
Church ;  but  to-day  it  is,  as  a  mere  matter  of  tactics, 
the  worst  possible  attitude.  The  modem  world  dis- 
trusts any  institution  that  takes  a  partisan  attitude 
toward  truth.  The  apparent  dread  of  free  thought 
makes  it  a  position  of  weakness.  Beliefs  should  be 
taken  on  their  merits  instead  of  because  they  are  the 
traditional  beliefs  of  a  certain  church.  The  physicist 
is  free  to  accept  or  reject  any  physical  theory,  accord- 
ing to  the  evidence  as  he  sees  it ;  if  the  Christian  were 
equally  free  to  believe  or  doubt  the  doctrines  worked 
out  by  earlier  generations,  thousands  would  heartily 


68  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

join  the  Church  who  at  present  look  upon  her  as  the 
enemy  of  candor  and  open-mindedness. 

At  the  present  time  there  are  three  attitudes  fight- 
ing for  supremacy  in  the  Church.  There  are  the 
ultra-conservatives,  who  wish  to  yield  no  inch  of 
ground  to  the  spirit  of  modernism,  who  obstinately 
believe  that  they  possess  the  ultimate  and  guaranteed 
truth,  who  brand  historical  criticism  and  naturalistic 
religious  psychology  as  treason.  So  long  as  this  at- 
titude can  be  maintained,  it  means,  for  this  group, 
mental  quiet,  relief  from  personal  responsibility,  a 
comfortable  feeling  of  certitude  and  permanence. 
But  if  it  wins  the  day  in  the  Church,  the  world  will 
simply  move  on  and  leave  these  "  believers  ''  high  and 
dry,  without  influence,  cherishing  their  illusory  certi- 
tude in  their  isolated  oasis  of  peace. 

Then  there  are  the  grudgingly  progressive,  who  dis- 
trust every  new  idea,  but  are  reluctantly  forced  along 
by  the  current.  Giving  up  one  belief  after  another, 
always  nervously  in  dread  of  every  new  discovery, 
they  live  with  their  backs  to  the  wall.  Their  thought 
spends  itself  in  attempts  at  harmonizing  alien  ideas ; 
they  often  use  the  language  of  modernism  without 
really  catching  its  spirit,  and  vainly  try  to  serve  two 
masters.  Half  conscious  of  the  insecurity  of  their 
compromises,  they  are  afraid  of  every  wind  that  blows. 
Such  an  attitude  is  pathetic  and  ignominious,  and 
happily  can  only  be  transitory. 

The  only  ultimate  safety  for  the  Church  lies  in  a 
fearless  welcome  to  the  spirit  of  free  thought  and  a 
frank  hospitality  to  criticism.  This  attitude  would 
make  the  Church,  instead  of  a  perpetual  loser,  again 
the  leader  in  intellectual  progress.  The  Church  has 
been  on  the  wrong  track.  The  instinct  of  self-pres- 
ervation has  led  it  to  oppose  the  very  sciences  whose 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  69 

alliance  it  needs.  It  must  now  be  ready  to  scrap 
every  dogma  that  seems  insufficiently  supported  by 
facts;  it  must  cultivate  the  passion  for  truth,  ever 
more  truth,  and  have  faith  in  the  freedom  of  the  hu- 
man mind. 

If  you  ask,  then,  Can  a  freethinker  be  a  Christian, 
the  answer  is.  Every  Christian  ought  to  be  a  free- 
thinker. The  antagonism  between  Christianity  and 
free  thought  has  been  a  mistaken  and  tragic  antago- 
nism. It  has  turned  millions  of  men  and  women  who 
were  potentially  Christian,  potentially  of  great  value 
to  the  Church  and  to  the  world,  into  skeptics  and  scof- 
fers. If  we  love  the  Church,  we  cannot  too  earnestly 
insist  that  Christianity  does  not  imply  any  intellec- 
tual subservience  or  stagnation.  "  The  only  cause,'' 
as  Professor  C.  C.  Everett  once  wrote,  "  for  which  any 
one  need  hesitate  to  take  the  name  ^  Christian  '  would 
be  the  doubt  whether  he  was  worthy  to  bear  it." 

The  question  whether  we  shall  proclaim  our  diver- 
gences freely  or  keep  them  to  ourselves  has,  indeed, 
two  sides.  There  are  so  many,  especially  elderly  peo- 
ple who  have  leaned  hard  and  long  on  their  particular 
form  of  faith,  to  whom  the  loss  of  it,  even  the  ques- 
tioning of  it,  is  a  bitter  and  demoralizing  experience, 
that  we  may  well  shrink  from  needlessly  intruding 
upon  their  peace.  But  on  the  other  hand,  to  leave 
the  floor  to  the  stand-patters  is  to  miss  the  opportu- 
nity of  moulding  the  Church  of  the  future.  The  bit- 
terness and  loss  are,  after  all,  inevitable,  if  not 
to  the  present  generation,  then  to  the  next.  If 
men  will  dream  dreams  they  must  suffer  disillu- 
sion. Those  who  are  really  to  blame  for  the  pain 
that  comes  with  the  loss  of  traditional  beliefs  are  not 
those  who  expose  their  untruth,  but  those  who  taught 
that  true  religion  was  not  possible  without  them. 


70  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

So  acute  is  this  danger  that  it  is  essential  that 
Christian  ideals  be  based  solidly  upon  reason  and  ex- 
perience, rather  than  upon  the  flimsy  foundations  of 
miracle  and  super-rationalism.  For  the  most  hopeless 
immorality  is  that  which  follows  the  reaction  from 
a  faith  found  to  be  untrue.  When  all  the  sanctions 
of  virtue  have  been  put  in  certain  beliefs,  and  when 
these  are  suspected  to  be  baseless,  both  totter  to- 
gether. Never  having  learned  that  religion  and 
morality  have  their  natural  and  unescapable  laws 
apart  from  these  traditions,  men  fling  them  away  as 
the  imposture  of  priests,  bogey  tales  invented  to  keep 
them  from  their  rightful  pleasures;  all  restraint 
seems  arbitrary,  and  they  fly  to  license  and  excess. 

Such  an  experience  was  that  of  Frederic  W.  Rob- 
ertson, who  was  disclosing  his  own  heart  when  he 
wrote :  "  It  is  an  awful  moment  when  the  soul  be- 
gins to  find  that  the  props  on  which  it  has  blindly 
rested  so  long  are,  many  of  them,  rotten,  and  begins 
to  suspect  them  all;  when  it  begins  to  feel  the  noth- 
ingness of  many  of  the  traditionary  opinions  which 
have  been  received  with  implicit  confidence,  and  in 
that  horrible  uncertainty  begins  also  to  doubt  whether 
there  be  anything  at  all  to  believe." 

Even  when  this  confusion  of  the  spiritual  and  the 
miraculous  leads  —  when  the  latter  crumbles  —  to 
no  such  lapse  of  morals,  it  often  brings  the  sharpest 
agony  of  spirit.  He  who  has  once  attuned  his  thought 
and  emotion  to  a  particular  world-view  is  apt  to  feel, 
when  that  dissolves,  that  all  is  lost;  as  the  death  of 
a  loved  one  may  remove  all  that  made  life  tolerable. 
The  fault,  of  course,  was  his  who  taught  such  an  one 
to  lean  so  hard  on  uncertainties;  if  he  had  not  been 
brought  up  on  these  dreams  he  would  not  have  come 
to  this  despair.     So,  if  a  child  should  grow  up  in 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  71 

ignorance  of  pain  and  deatli,  would  the  knowledge  of 
these  things,  when  it  came  to  him,  seem  to  take  all 
beauty  and  all  joy  from  the  world;  while  if  he  had  al- 
ways known  of  them  he  would  have  accepted  their 
existence  and  still  found  that  beauty  and  that  joy 
that  actually,  in  spite  of  pain  and  death,  inhere  in 
life.  If,  then,  we  have  to  pay  for  our  fathers'  blind- 
ness, let  us  see  to  it  that  our  children  have  not  to  pay 
for  it  also. 

Moreover,  destructive  criticism  is  in  the  air;  and 
if  we  do  not  speak  out  reverently  and  gently,  the 
truths  we  hide  will  be  shouted  by  profaner  lips.  It 
is  hopeless  to  try  to  save  the  traditional  dogmas. 
The  world  is  simply  getting  beyond  them.  Argu- 
ments pro  and  con  matter  little,  the  time-spirit  is  in- 
exorably leading  us  on.  If  we  try  to  save  everything 
we  lose  everything.  The  only  chance  for  the  Church 
to  have  a  long  and  useful  future  is  for  her  to  drop 
overboard  whatever  becomes  obsolete. 

It  is  not  only,  however,  in  theological  matters  that 
free  thought  within  the  Church  is  choked,  but  in  the 
application  of  Christian  principles  to  concrete  situ- 
ations. As  we  saw  in  an  earlier  chapter,  a  large  pro- 
portion of  the  wealthier  people  —  and  they  are  the  pre- 
dominant force  in  most  of  the  churches  —  do  not  want 
the  "  social  Gospel.''  Nor  do  the  pewholders  want  too 
concrete  and  searching  a  personal  Gospel.  They  pre- 
fer their  idealism  served  in  the  abstract,  or  applied  to 
Biblical  situations,  not  applied  to  their  own  lives. 
The  minister  who  dares  to  denounce  the  pet  sins  of  his 
parishioners  is  likely  to  have  an  unhappy  time  of  it. 
The  church-members  want  to  save  the  heathen ;  they  do 
not  want  to  be  saved.  When  Christianity  begins  to 
search  out  their  own  hardness  of  heart,  it  is  called 
"  radicalism,"  and  the  preacher's  freedom  of  speech  is 


72  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

called  "  sensationalism."  Many  an  honest  preacher 
has  found  this  degree  of  freedom  of  speech  insufficient, 
and  has  left  the  pulpit. 

Even  the  theological  schools  are  not  yet  ready  to  tol- 
erate genuine  freedom  of  thought  on  either  historical 
or  theological  or  social  matters.  The  trustees  usually 
avoid  the  scandal  of  a  public  charge  or  trial ;  the  pro- 
fessor or  student  who  talks  too  "  radically  "  is  quietly 
dismissed.  In  the  year  1920  the  dean  of  a  well-known 
Episcopal  theological  school  in  the  East  was  censured 
by  the  trustees  because  he  had  joined  the  Church 
League  for  Industrial  Democracy,  an  organization 
composed  almost  entirely  of  Episcopalians,  whose  ob- 
ject is,  in  the  words  of  their  platform,  "  to  unite  for 
intercession  and  labor  those  within  our  Church  AA^ho 
believe  it  an  essential  part  of  the  Church's  function 
to  make  justice  and  love  the  controlling  motive  in 
all  social  conditions  and  who  as  Christians  wish  to 
promote  all  sound  movements  looking  toward  the  de- 
mocratization of  industry  and  socialization  of  life.'' 

The  trustees  of  the  school  declared  that  "  there  can 
be  no  objection  to  such  a  platform  from  the  standpoint 
of  Christianity  .  .  .  [But]  in  the  present  state  of  the 
public  mind  and  from  the  standpoint  of  the  citizen  of 
the  world,  whether  he  calls  himself  a  Christian  or  not, 
we  think  it  unwise,  however,  for  the  members  of  the 
faculty  of  the Divinity  School  to  associate  them- 
selves with  this  and  other  similar  organizations.'' 

A  contemporary  periodical  —  one  of  the  leading 
American  journals  of  opinion  —  commented  thus  on 
the  case :  "  The  next  Church  conference  which  dis- 
cusses why  Christianity  is  losing  its  hold  upon  the 
popular  imagination  should  closely  consider  this  art- 
less revelation.  How  can  religion  hope  to  inspire  lib- 
erating conviction  among  its  followers  when  its  lay- 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  73 

men  can  witli  impunity  cliide  a  priest  for  acting  on 
wliat  tliej  admit  to  be  the  principles  of  the  Gospel 
instead  of  those  of  a  ^  citizen  of  the  world  '?  ...  If,  as 
the  trustees  declare,  the  principle  of  the  Gospel  ^  fully 
and  freely  applied  ^  holds  a  solution  of  industrial  and 
social  problems  and  if  a  Christian  clergyman  is  placed 
under  the  ban  for  tiying  to  apply  fully  and  freely 
Christian  ethics  to  these  problems,  it  is  surely  hard  to 
avoid  one  disagreeable  inference.  The  Church  which 
permits  such  a  thing  to  happen  is  controlled  by  people 
who  do  not  want  Christian  principles  fully  and  freely 
applied  to  social  and  industrial  problems.'' 

It  is  worth  while  relating  one  such  incident  out  of 
many,  not  to  show  the  illiberalism  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  (that  Church  is  actually  in  many  ways  one  of 
the  more  liberal),  but  to  call  attention  to  a  situation 
which  is  very  widespread.  A  few  theological  schools 
are  really  free,  a  few  churches,  especially  the  decen- 
tralized ones,  are  really  free.  But  the  great  mass 
of  churches  are  very  far  from  espousing  the  ideal  of 
free  thought  and  free  speech,  which  is  at  least  accorded 
lip-reverence  everywhere  outside  the  churches. 

Thus  to  those  who  love  the  Church  and  long  to  see 
her  potentialities  for  good  most  widely  unfolded,  the 
present  situation  is  one  of  grave  anxiety.  A  large 
proportion  of  the  community  has  lost  its  confidence  in 
her  and  receives  her  teaching  with  open  skepticism  or 
secret  reservation.  The  reason  for  this  is  simply  that 
the  current  expressions  and  exj^lanations  of  religion, 
inherited  from  an  older  age,  are  still  usually  at  odds 
with  scientific  knowledge  and  the  scientific  spirit, 
which  form  the  intellectual  viewpoint  of  the  new 
times.  Selfishness  and  sin  are  eternal  enemies  of 
religion;  but  our  age  is  not  less  earnest,  not  less 
aspiring,  than  others  have  been;  and  if  it  seems  less 


74  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

reHgious  it  is  mainly  because  religion  lias  been  offered 
to  men  in  language  wliicli  many  of  them  cannot  re- 
ceive. The  Church  generally  thinks  itself  committed 
to  the  formulas  of  a  prescientific  age ;  and  its  histori- 
cal and  theological  teachings  are  usually  at  variance 
with  the  views  of  the  history  of  religion  and  the  nature 
of  the  universe  which  are  now  accepted  by  impartial 
scholars. 

The  great  majority  of  men  and  women  who  are 
graduating  from  our  colleges  cannot  honestly  sub- 
scribe to  the  traditional  doctrines.  They  have  been 
reading  the  great  thinkers  of  the  past  and  present, 
they  have  come  in  touch  with  too  many  currents  of 
vital  thought,  to  sink  back  into  the  dogmatic  lethargy 
of  the  historic  communions.  The  great  thinkers  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  the  nineteenth,  the  twentieth 

—  the  men  who  really  count  in  shaping  the  thought 
of  the  world  —  are  all  heretics.  You  cannot  hide  or 
minimize  that  fact.  In  the  face  of  their  fearless  and 
forward-looking  thought,  the  evasions  and  ingenuities 
of  protective  apologetics  are  seen  for  what  they  are 

—  mere  halting-places  on  the  way  to  oblivion. 

But  the  discontent,  the  restlessness  and  impatience, 
are  not  confined  to  the  college-bred,  or  the  scientifi- 
cally-trained. Masses  of  people  to-day,  without  being 
able  clearly  to  justify  their  doubts,  have  become  skep- 
tical of  the  Church's  historic  slogans.  They  find 
nothing  in  their  experience  or  reading  that  connects 
with  these  dogmas,  and  they  have  slipped  them  si- 
lently into  the  limbo  of  unreality. 

What  the  Church  needs,  then,  is  a  great  wind  of 
free  thought  —  not  reckless  scoffing  free  thought 
from  the  outside,  but  earnest  constructive  free 
thought  from  within.  She  must  make  a  new  alliance, 
she  must  preach  the  impartial  spirit,  the  truth-seeking 


ENCOURAGING  FREE  THOUGHT  75 

spirit,  she  must  clear  her  reputation  of  partisanship 
and  fostered  ignorance.  She  must  frankly  discard 
her  obsolete  creeds,  her  absurd  hymns,  her  absurd 
Sunday  school  lessons  that  teach  the  folk-lore  of 
Old  and  New  Testaments  as  if  it  were  literal  fact; 
she  must  learn  to  use  hymns  and  prayers  that  ex- 
press moral  ideals  and  aspirations,  to  teach  not 
legends  and  miracles,  but  the  wonder  of  a  purified 
heart  and  an  altered  life.  She  must  definitely  and 
frankly  ally  herself  with  science,  and  use  all  of  its 
resources  in  her  work.  Thus  and  thus  only  can  she 
become  again  the  force  she  once  was,  the  force  in  the 
world  that  those  who  love  her  long  to  see  her  again 
become. 


CHAPTER  SEVEN 

SHARPENING   THE   CHURCH'S   THINKING 

Perfect  freedom  of  thought  and  speech  is  the  pre- 
requisite of  mental  health  in  any  institution  or  or- 
ganization. But  it  is  not  enough.  Thought  may  be 
free  but  foolish.  The  Church  needs  not  only  the 
spirit  of  tolerance  and  open-mindedness,  it  needs  to 
train  its  members,  and  above  all  its  ministers  and 
writers,  in  accurate  thinking. 

Space  would  fail  us  to  indicate  a  tithe  of  the  fal- 
lacies and  confusions  current  in  theological  specula- 
tion, in  contemporary  sermons  and  popular  essays  on 
religion.  There  is  no  other  field  in  which  so  much 
is  written  and  spoken  that  is  hopelessly  illogical  or 
muddled.  But  it  will  serve  at  least  the  purpose  of 
illustration  to  discuss  a  few  of  the  points  where  the 
current  thought  of  churchmen  seems  oftenest  uncer- 
tain and  lacking  in  logical  rigor. 

First,  then,  we  may  consider  the  underlying  ques- 
tion of  the  authority  upon  which  we  rest  our  belief  in 
the  Christian  teaching.  This  is  one  of  the  points 
upon  which  we  should  demand  absolute  clarity.  Does 
the  Church  rest  the  authoritativeness  of  its  preaching 
ultimately  upon  the  fact  that  the  Bible  says  so,  or 
that  Christ  says  so?  Or  is  it  willing  frankly  to  say 
that  the  fact  that  it  is  written  thus  and  so  in  the 
Bible,  or  that  Christ  believed  it,  is  no  more  a  guaranty 
of  its  truth  than  is  the  sincere  belief  of  any  high- 
minded  writer  or  teacher? 

76 


SHARPENING  THE  CHURCH'S  THINKING         77 

The  comparative  study  of  religion  shows  that  many 
sacred  books  and  persons  have  been  regarded  as 
authoritative  sources  of  truth.  In  the  case  of  the 
Hebrew-Christian  Scriptures  it  is  easy  to  trace  the 
process  through  which  these  very  various  writings 
came  to  be  grouped  together  and  gradually  invested 
with  the  peculiar  sanctity  which  they  have  had  for 
the  Church.  It  is  easy  to  point  to  the  naivete  of 
many  of  the  ideas  therein  expressed,  to  the  historical 
inaccuracies  and  inconsistencies,  and  even  to  the 
crudeness  of  the  morality  in  certain  passages  of  both 
Old  and  New  Testaments.^  All  this  is,  of  course,  in- 
CAdtable,  in  an  anthology,  such  as  the  Bible  is,  of  the 
literature  of  a  rather  i)rimitive,  if  singularly  reli- 
gious, people.  It  would  certainly  not  be  worth  dwell- 
ing upon  were  it  not  for  the  persistence  of  reference 
in  the  Church  to  the  Bible  as  the  source  of  its  teach- 
ing. An  incidental  result  is  that  ideas  and  moral  at- 
titudes that  would  long  ago  have  been  generally  dis- 
credited are  assumed  to  be  correct  and  praiseworthy 
because  of  their  Biblical  context ;  and  men  who  were 
passionate,  headstrong,  fanatical,  or  grossly  immoral 
are  held  up  to  children  as  Bible-heroes.  The  arrogant 
conceit  of  the  Jews  that  they  were  the  chosen  people 
of  the  Lord,  and  therefore  justified  in  invading  a 
peaceful  land,  destroying  the  indigenous  civilization, 
and  imposing  upon  it  their  own  culture  and  religion, 
is  condoned  and  acclaimed  by  some  of  the  very  people 
w^ho  were  loud  in  their  condemnation  of  a  similar 
tribal  arrogance  in  the  Prussians  of  our  own  day. 

There   is    no    stable   half-way    point.     Either   the 

1  The  flaws  in  the  Bible  have  been  so  often  pointed  out  in  detail 
that  it  seems  unnecessary  (and  it  is  always  unpleasant)  to  call 
specific  attention  to  them  here.  The  present  writer  has  summarized 
the  well-known  facts  in  his  Prohlems  of  Religion,  Chap.  XVII,  The 
Interpretation  of  the  Bible. 


78  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

Bible  is  a  supernaturally  inspired  book,  and  its  teach- 
ings to  be  accepted  from  cover  to  cover,  however  diffi- 
cult for  our  intellects  or  repugnant  to  our  moral 
sense;  or  else  it  is  a  book  like  any  other,  to  be  read 
with  interest  and  profit,  but  of  no  particular  value  as 
proof  of  anything  or  as  standard  for  our  ethical  judg- 
ments and  religious  beliefs.  The  former  view  has 
been  rejected  by  the  whole  world  outside  of  narrow- 
ing "  orthodox  ''  circles.  But  there  are  many  in  the 
Church  who  have  not  frankly  and  squarely  recognized 
that  the  other  view  described  is  the  only  alternative. 

For  example,  Paul's  picture  of  the  Judgment  Day 
in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  I.  Corinthians,  which  would 
seem  simply  fantastic  to  us  if  we  really  grasped  his 
meaning,  is  seriously  read  at  Christian  funerals,  as 
if  the  fact  of  its  being  in  the  Bible  must  make  it  mean 
what  Christians  currently  believe,  and  somehow  guar- 
antee the  truth  of  that  belief!  The  obvious  illogical- 
ity  of  Paul's  arguments,  and  the  fact  that  the  whole 
thing  is  simply  current  Jewish  speculation  on  the 
part  of  a  man  who,  though  genuinely  Christianized 
in  his  spirit,  remained  to  the  end  the  Gr?eco-rabbinic 
theologian  that  he  had  been  before  conversion,  are 
ignored,  because  it  is  in  the  Bible ! 

It  is  an  ungracious  act  to  find  flaws  in  the  Bible, 
or  illusion  and  prejudice  in  the  words  of  the  heroes 
and  authors  thereof.  But  the  Church  cannot  regain 
the  confidence  of  the  educated  until  it  recognizes 
clearly  that  its  source  of  authority  is  not  the  words  of 
any  historic  teacher,  or  of  any  Book,  but  simply  the 
evidence  of  human  experience,  with  the  conclusions 
logically  deducible  therefrom.  There  is  much  human 
experience  in  the  Bible  that  is  of  utmost  value  for 
our  thought;  but  it  must  be  subjected  to  the  same 
critical  scrutiny  that  we  should  apply  to  any  other 


SHARPENING  THE  CHURCH'S  THINKING         79 

documents,  and  used  with  the  same  sifting  and  the 
same  caution.  Christian  religious  psychology  is 
much  like  any  other  religious  psychology,  as  naive, 
as  liable  to  misconceptions,  to  exaggeration  and  false 
inference.  The  possession  of  great  spirituality,  even 
of  great  mental  ability,  by  no  means  implies  correct 
thinking.  If  false  premises  are  assumed,  openly  or 
unconsciously,  the  keenest  reasoning  will  lead  to 
error.  Indeed,  men  of  moral  insight  and  religious 
fervor  are  very  apt  to  be  more  than  commonly  lacking 
in  the  critical  faculty ;  the  two  interests  are  divergent, 
and  few  can  keep  both  w^arm-hearted  and  cool-headed. 
So  that  a  caution  in  accepting  the  beliefs  of  the 
founders  of  our  faith  may  go  hand  in  hand  with  the 
heartiest  appreciation  of  their  genius  and  a  loyal  in- 
tent to  cherish  the  flame  that  they  kindled. 

The  Historical  Method  is  a  very  recent  achievement 
of  the  human  mind,  and  a  very  great  achievement.  If 
every  minister  of  the  Gospel  and  writer  on  religion 
could  be  compelled  to  read  such  a  brief  study  of  it 
as  Mr.  H.  B.  George's  Historical  Method^  the  slip- 
shod acceptance  of  Biblical  narratives  at  their  face 
value  would  soon  become  a  matter  of  the  past.  Mem- 
ory is  notorioush^  unreliable;  and  when,  as  in  re- 
ligious chronicle,  biography,  or  autobiography,  the 
writer  has  eager  convictions,  he  is  almost  bound  to 
read  more  into  incidents  than  occurred,  to  touch  up 
an  episode  to  make  a  good  story  out  of  it,  to  remember 
events  somewhat  more  in  line  with  the  way  they 
should  have  occurred  to  accord  with  his  background 
of  beliefs.  When  such  stories,  before  being  written 
down,  are  passed  on  orally  for  some  years,  from  mouth 
to  mouth,  especiall}^  in  a  hero-loving  and  wonder-lov- 
ing age,  and  especially  wdien  the  tellers  have  a  faith 
to  preserve  and  justify  by  every  available  means,  the 


80  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

final  form  of  the  narrative  may  differ  to  any  extent 
from  the  facts  from  which  it  sprang. 

The  wonder  is  that  historians  have  been  able,  even 
confusedly,  to  reconstruct  a  historical  picture  of  the 
life  of  Christ  and  of  the  earlier  and  later  events  re- 
ferred to  in  the  Bible.  It  ceases  to  be  a  wonder,  how- 
ever, and  becomes  a  matter  of  skilful  historical  re- 
search, when  one  studies  in  detail  the  clues  and  tlie 
processes  of  inference  which  are  steadily  making  that 
reconstruction  more  convincing.  There  is  much,  of 
course,  concerning  which  we  shall  never  now  be  able 
to  know  w^hat  the  actual  facts  were.  But  to  a  far 
greater  degree  than  would  once  have  seemed  possible, 
we  can  now  disentangle  fact  from  fancy  and  under- 
stand the  natural  train  of  causes  that  produced  our 
religion,  and  that  led  to  its  embellishment  by  legend 
and  myth  and  miracle.  Such  a  scrupulously  histori- 
cal point  of  view  is  the  only  attitude  worthy  of  the 
Church,  and  the  only  one  that  can  ultimately  survive. 
Church-literature,  Sunday-school  texts,  and  current 
preaching  need  a  great  deal  of  pruning  and  restate- 
ment to  adapt  them  to  that  ideal. 

But  it  is  not  only  in  matters  of  history  that  ec- 
clesiastical thinking  needs  to  be  sharpened,  the  lack 
of  logic  is  even  more  apparent  in  current  apologetic. 
Reason  and  experience,  though  the  proper  criteria 
for  belief,  are  far  from  being  its  usual  causes;  few 
people  ever  learn  to  judge  dispassionately  of  argu- 
ments. For  the  believer's  conviction  does  not  really 
hinge  upon  them.  Secure  in  his  assurance  of  the 
truth,  he  can  afford  to  scorn  any  petty  w^ord-splitting, 
flaw-picking  criticisms  of  his  arguments.  What 
though  he  has  not  yet  learned  to  refute  all  the  skeptics 
and  explain  all  the  mysteries,  an  assured  truth  is  not 
weakened  by  poor  defence! 


SHARPENING  THE  CHURCH'S  THINKING  81 

For  this  reason  the  preacher  and  theologian  are 
rarely  good  logicians.  They  may  show  much  inge- 
nuity in  their  arguments,  but  they  do  not  believe  be- 
cause of  the  arguments;  the  belief  is  antecedent,  the 
apologetic  subsequent,  and  of  secondary  importance. 
It  is  possible  to  defend  almost  any  opinion  so  plausi- 
bly that  those  who  are  biased  in  its  favor  will  not 
detect  the  fallacies  or  tacit  assumptions.  And  in- 
deed, the  number  of  those  who  have  undertaken  the 
arduous  training  that  would  fit  them  for  this  difficult 
role  of  critic  of  arguments  is  very  small;  our  system 
of  education  does  little  to  teach  that  most  valuable 
acquisition.  In  most  matters  wrong  processes  of 
thought  are  checked  sooner  or  later  by  being  con- 
fronted by  facts  inconsistent  with  their  conclusions; 
but  where  the  matters  reasoned  of  are  as  much  "  in 
the  air  "  as  religious  controversy  is,  where  the  results 
of  reasoning  cannot  be  directly  and  obviously  dis- 
proved by  concrete  tangible  facts,  there  are  few  so 
well  trained  as  to  see  that  the  method  of  reaching 
the  given  conclusions  was  wrong  and  could  not  lead 
to  reliable  results.  It  might  be  well  to  add  to  a  work 
on  the  Historical  Method,  in  our  curriculum  for  pros- 
pective ministers  and  theologians,  such  a  volume  as 
Mill's  Logic.  A  careful  adherence  to  its  lessons 
would  rid  the  world  of  a  vast  amount  of  rubbish ! 

Among  the  most  slipshod  of  contemporary  thought- 
processes  are  some  of  those  that  take  refuge  under  the 
caption  "  pragmatism."  It  is  said  on  every  hand  that 
this  or  that  belief  is  true  because  it  "  works." 
Strictly  speaking,  to  say  that  a  belief  works  should 
mean  that  it  serves  to  summarize  and  predict  experi- 
ence; that  data  are  observed  to  coincide  with  what  it 
would  lead  us  to  expect,  while  nothing  is  observed 
that  is  out  of  harmony  with  it.     Even  taken  in  this 


82  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

valid  sense,  "  working ''  is  not  an  infallible  test  of 
truth,  for  our  data  are  usually  very  fragmentary,  and 
often  very  confused.  It  often  happens  that  although 
nothing  has  come  to  light  that  contradicts  a  certain 
theory,  nothing  has  come  to  light  either  that  would 
contradict  a  very  different  belief.  And  it  oftener  yet 
happens  that  certain  facts  seem  to  make  against  one 
theory  and  other  facts  seem  to  make  against  the  al- 
ternative theory.  Almost  any  theory  "  works  '^  so 
long  as  you  look  only  at  certain  classes  of  facts  and 
ignore  others.  As  Bernard  Shaw  puts  it,  "  most 
theories  will  work  if  you  put  your  back  into  making 
them  w^ork.'^ 

The  actual  situation  is  that  most  historic  theologi- 
cal doctrines  can  be  confronted  with  facts  with  re- 
gard to  which  they  do  not  "  work."  The  customary 
evasion  is  to  counsel  humility  and  faith  in  the  pres- 
ence of  these  "  mysteries."  To  which  the  obvious  an- 
swer is  that  if  we  could  certainly  know  the  theories 
in  question  to  be  true,  we  could  aw^ait  in  patience  the 
resolving  of  these  difficulties ;  but  that  if  the  theories 
are  to  be  recommended  to  us  on  the  ground  that  they 
"  work,"  then  the  existence  of  cases  in  which  they  do 
not  seem  to  work  cancels  the  evidence  which  recom- 
mends them. 

The  situation  is  further  complicated  by  the  fact 
that  "  works  "  is  popularly  taken  to  mean  ^'  inspires." 
If  a  belief  leads  to  happiness  and  morality,  it  is 
thereby  to  be  accredited  as  true.  For  example,  a 
recent  liberal  theologian  writes :  ^'  Of  course,  the 
kind  of  life  that  religious  belief  creates  must  be  the 
ultimate  judgment  pronounced  upon  the  truth  of  the 
religious  philosophy  involved."  This  argument  rests 
upon  an  implied  major  premise  that  whatever  belief 
leads  to  a  noble  life  must  be  a  true  belief.     But,  on 


SHARPENING  THE  CHURCH'S  THINKING         83 

the  contrary,  experience  repeatedly  has  shown  that 
delusions  may  inspire  men  to  noble  living;  the  in- 
spirational effect  of  a  belief  has  nothing  whatever  to 
do  with  its  truth.  It  ins^nres  because  it  is  helicved 
to  be  true ;  whether  it  actually  is  true  or  not  does  not 
affect  its  inspirational  value  for  the  believer.  More- 
over, many  widely  contradictory  beliefs  have  stimu- 
lated and  consoled  men;  and  (as  a  matter  of  fact), 
all  sorts  of  divergent  doctrines  are  actually  being  ac- 
credited by  their  disciples  on  the  ground  of  their 
practical  value. 

The  implicit  major  premise  is  occasionally  made 
explicit,  as  in  Father  Tyrrell's  Lew  Orandij  where  he 
declares  that  "  no  belief  can  be  universally  and  per- 
petually useful  unless  it  also  be  true,''  and  goes  on  to 
say  that  "  in  the  case  of  the  Christian  creed  the  ex- 
perience of  the  Christian  oy^his  terrarum  offers  a  cri- 
terion as  to  such  universal  and  perpetual  usefulness." 
The  chapters  that  follow  attempt  to  show  in  detail 
the  usefulness  of  the  various  items  of  the  Catholic 
creed,  with  the  assumption  in  each  case  that  because 
inspirational  they  must  be  true.  A  similar  argument 
is  oft'ered  for  the  truth  of  the  central  doctrine  of 
Christian  Science,  that  there  is  no  evil.  No  other 
doctrine,  perhaps,  in  recent  years,  has  had  such  strik- 
ing practical  effects.  But  indeed,  what  religion  has 
not  been  a  comfort  and  an  inspiration  to  its  disciples ! 
The  whole  argument  is,  of  course,  a  mere  argumentiim 
ad  populiimj  a  fallacy  which  no  really  disinterested 
seeker  after  truth  would  commit.  The  observable 
practical  value  of  a  belief  may  lead  us  to  tolerate  it 
even  if  we  have  reason  to  believe  it  untrue,  may  lead 
us  even  to  ^'  will  to  believe  "  it,  if  we  can,  in  the  lack 
of  convincing  evidence  one  way  or  the  other.  But  if 
we  are  ever  to  get  out  of  the  hopeless  muddle  in  which 


84  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

religious  belief  now  wallows,  one  of  the  first  steps 
will  be  to  look  not  for  "  satisfactory  ''  and  soothing 
beliefs,  but  for  objective  evidence  —  against  as  well 
as  for  the  various  theories  that  are  in  the  field;  and 
to  refuse  to  bias  our  judgment  by  the  fact  that  one 
of  those  theories  is  in  harmony  with  our  desires. 
Many  truths  are  unpalatable  and  depressing.  But 
in  the  long  run  it  pays  to  look  them  squarely  in  the 
face.  We  must  get  away  absolutely  from  the  label- 
ling of  views  as  "  dangerous,"  "  upsetting,"  "  skepti- 
cal," "  demoralizing,"  "  unworthy."  The  one  and 
only  question  for  self-respecting  men  should  be.  What 
are  the  facts? 

It  is  doubtless  true  that  a  blunt  and  literal  state- 
ment of  the  facts  that  concern  some  moot  problem  is 
not  always  to  be  advised.  The  avoidance  of  ambigu- 
ity, the  sharpening  of  our  thinking,  is  not  the  only 
virtue.  To  share  the  religious  life  of  our  fellows,  to 
use  words  that  shall  convey  to  them  adequately  the 
spiritual  truth  that  we  wish  to  convey  —  this  too  is 
a  great  good,  and  to  many  seems  a  far  greater.  There 
is  some  kernel  of  truth,  probably,  in  all  or  most  of  the 
dogmas ;  and  even  if  those  truths  could  be  accurately 
expressed  in  the  bare  and  dry  language  of  science, 
they  would  very  likely  lose  thereby  their  vividness 
and  emotional  power.  Dogma  is  poetry,  dogma  is 
symbolism ;  and  our  passion  for  literal  exactness  must 
not  blind  us  to  the  value  of  rhetoric  and  trope.  Just 
as  the  exact  account  of  our  duties  to  our  countrymen 
seldom  arouses  patriotic  emotion,  while  the  singing 
of  a  national  hymn  may  bring  tears  to  the  eyes  and  a 
new  resolve  to  the  will,  so  in  practical  religion  the 
most  useful  language  is  not  the  meager  and  statistical 
phraseology  of  science,  but  the  sort  of  language  that 
the  prayer-books  use. 


SHARPENING  THE  CHURCH'S  THINKING         85 

It  is  possible,  then,  for  an  honest  man  to  say,  in 
respect  to  current  dogmas  which  he  can  not  literally 
believe :  There  is,  after  all,  a  heart  of  truth  in  these 
sacred  words,  which  we  are  likely  to  forget  if  we 
abandon  forthwith  the  old  formulae.  This  is  the  part 
that  made  the  rest  plausible,  because  here  the  concep- 
tion touched  fact.  By  retaining  this  mode  of  lan- 
guage, then,  we  can  meet  with  those  who  are  religious 
but  not  scientific,  and  express  our  common  religious 
experience  in  common  terms.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  discard  these  familiar  forms  and  vehicles  of  our 
religious  life,  we  can  hardly  help  losing  something 
also  of  the  vividness  and  unction  with  which  we  once 
expressed  our  spiritual  experience  and  aspiration. 
The  hallowed  phrases  root  deei3  in  our  hearts;  and 
so,  while  we  cannot  accept  them  as  literal  statements 
of  fact,  we  may  be  content  to  use  them,  with  others, 
as  a  symbolic  expression  of  what  is  deeply  vital  and 
eternally  true. 

Such  an  attitude  is  possible  to  an  honest  man ;  but 
it  is  not  altogether  satisfactory.  This  stretching  and 
straddling,  this  shirking  of  candid  and  outspoken 
statement,  this  temporizing  and  concealing  of  convic- 
tions is  dangerous  and  unfortunate.  Is  not,  perhaps, 
the  greatest  good,  after  all,  absolute  candor?  Do 
hazy  uncertainties  and  symbols  taken  in  different 
senses  by  different  people  make  for  spiritual  health? 
Will  not  needed  changes  in  our  belief  be  retarded  by 
this  hushing  up  of  divergencies?  Is  it  not  true  that 
pulpit-utterances  are  commonly  taken  by  the  world 
with  distrust  and  allowances?  The  clergy  stand  un- 
der a  widespread  suspicion  of  hypocrisy  and  cant. 
The  circumlocutions  by  which  ministers  who  read  and 
think  try  to  harmonize  the  conceptions  to  which  they 
find  themselves  led  with  the  stock  doctrines  of  the 


86  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

Church,  are  often  repeated  with  jeers  and  shrugs  by 
those  who  have  not  themselves  felt  this  dual  alle- 
giance. 

Certainly  this  attempt  to  straddle  has  resulted  in 
a  lowering  of  the  qualitj^  of  the  Christian  clergy. 
Many  pure  and  noble  men  there  are,  and  here  and 
there  one  of  marked  ability;  but  they  are  too  often 
to-day  men  of  warped  minds  and  narrow  horizons. 
The  ablest  men  from  the  colleges  usually  go  into  busi- 
ness, into  the  law,  into  medicine,  but  shun  the  min- 
istry. They  will  not  be  bound  by  the  beliefs  or  the 
phrases  of  their  grandfathers.  Some  of  the  oldest 
and  richest  theological  schools  have  dwindled  till 
they  now  boast  but  a  handful  of  students,  and  the 
demand  for  pastors  in  many  denominations  is  con- 
siderably greater  than  the  supply.  The  more  alert 
and  able  of  the  theological  students  do  not  fail  to  dis- 
cover the  dubious  nature  of  the  Church's  creeds.  And 
many  are  the  inw^ard  struggles  that  go  silently  on 
in  the  schools.  Not  a  few  abandon  their  intended 
career,  others  forget  their  doubts  in  practical  work 
or  decide  that  they  can  profess  the  creeds  "  in  a 
sense  " ;  despair  and  even  suicide  are  not  unknown. 
Surely  all  this  —  and  much  more  that  might  be  said 
—  is  a  significant  sign  of  the  fatal  mistake  the 
Church  is  making  in  continuing  to  cling  to  old  for- 
mulas and  expect  allegiance  to  antiquated  creeds. 
These  creeds  are  "  exactly  as  appropriate  to  the  cen- 
tury of  Copernican  astronomy  and  Darwinian  evolu- 
tion and  scientific  Biblical  criticism  as  one  of  the  an- 
cient Roman  galleys  w^ould  be  beside  one  of  our  latest 
type  of  turbine-driven  ocean  liners." 

Matters  are  mending,  however.  And  the  great  hope 
lies  in  education.  As  yet  only  a  very  small  percent- 
age of  our  people  have  even  a  high-school  education, 


SHARPENING  THE  CHURCH'S  THINKING         87 

and  but  one  out  of  five  hundred  has  been  to  college. 
When  that  percentage  is  increased  tenfold,  there  will 
be  either  a  great  intellectual  revolution  inside  the 
churches  or  a  great  withdrawal  from  them.  That  it 
may  be  the  former  and  not  the  latter  requires  the 
earnest  efforts  of  all  who  care  to  see  the  America  of 
the  future  a  religious  nation. 


CHAPTER  EIGHT 

WHAT  HAVE  WE  THAT  IS  CERTAIN? 

Liberal  minds  are  awakening  everywhere  to  the 
dangers  of  dogmatism,  and  are  attaining  to  that  stage 
of  intellectual  maturity  that  asks  for  evidence  of 
proffered  beliefs,  for  verification  of  religious  truth,  in 
the  same  sense  in  which  the  laws  of  gravitation  or  of 
evolution  are  verifiable  in  universally  repeatable  ex- 
perience. This  is  a  healthy  condition  of  things ;  it  is 
the  goal  of  much  patient  labor  and  earnest  pleading 
from  our  intellectual  leaders.  One  of  the  greatest 
obstacles  to  the  progress  of  man  and  the  attainment 
of  truth  has  been  an  over-easy  acquiescence  in  the 
plausible,  an  inert  contentment  with  what  appeals  to 
the  emotions  or  satisfies  the  heart,  a  feeble  readiness 
to  yield  assent  when  no  evidence  has  been  shown 
which  should  properly  convince  the  understanding. 
It  is  this  proneness  to  the  hasty  formation  of  belief 
that  breeds  bias  and  prejudice,  and  confuses  our  ad- 
vance with  so  much  mutual  misunderstanding  and 
thwarting.  For  the  correct  solution  of  all  our  prob- 
lems, physical,  political,  moral,  religious,  we  need  the 
temper  that  weighs  and  waits,  that  scrutinizes  judi- 
cially all  sides  of  a  debatable  proposition,  analyzes 
cautiously,  discriminates,  and  maintains  for  long  a 
skeptical  attitude  toward  alleged  facts,  proposed 
remedies,  and  impassioned  appeals  for  credence;  the 
temper  that  puts  investigation  before  acceptance,  that 
"  will  not  make  its  judgment  blind.''     We  have  made 

S8 


WHAT  HAVE  WE  THAT  IS  CERTAIN?  89 

SO  many  mistakes,  we  have  pinned  our  faith  to  so 
many  ideas  that  turned  out  to  be  untrue  —  I  say 
"  we/'  meaning  all  the  generations  of  men,  for  no  one 
of  us  is  guiltless  though  the  Christian  Church  has  far 
more  than  her  share  of  blame  in  the  matter  —  that 
those  who  have  studied  at  all  carefully  the  conditions 
of  human  progress  must  heartily,  and  with  great  re- 
lief, welcome  the  growing  spirit  of  criticism  and  of 
caution. 

There  is,  indeed,  in  "  orthodox  "  circles,  a  profound 
distrust  of  this  spirit.  It  is  felt  to  be  subversive  of 
the  faith,  the  sign  of  an  unbelieving  and  materialistic 
generation.  But  why?  It  is  not  criticism  that  is  to 
be  deprecated,  but  apathy.  The  hopeless  man  is  he 
who  is  not  interested  enough  to  look  for  evidence  of 
spiritual  truth,  the  mentally  inert  or  worldly  minded 
man.  If  our  religion  is  true,  it  can  stand  the  test  of 
doubt.  Nay,  it  must,  more  and  more,  emerge  into 
prominence  against  the  fading  background  of  dis- 
credited untruths.  The  dread  of  free  investigation 
and  discussion  is  quite  unnecessary.  Christianity  — 
at  least  enough  in  Christianity  to  make  it  stand  out 
as  the  greatest  thing  in  the  world  —  is  experimentally 
verifiable,  the  evidence  for  its  truth  is  at  hand.  How- 
ever dubious  may  be  the  historic  creeds  —  men's  at- 
tempts to  express  and  explain  —  the  underlying 
strata  of  the  religion  consist  of  experiences,  enacted 
in  the  inner  life  of  Christ,  of  Paul,  of  all  those  to 
whom  the  religion  has  been  real  and  precious,  and 
reenactable  in  our  lives  if  we  will  but  open  our  hearts 
and  seek  to  learn  the  secret  thereof.  Christianity, 
we  must  continually  repeat,  is  a  w^ay  to  live,  a  solu- 
tion for  life ;  and  those  who  have  learned  the  way,  who 
have  solved  their  life-problem,  know  that  they  have 
attained  to  great  and  precious  truths.     Who  more 


90  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

eagerly  than  the  Christian,  then,  should  welcome  the 
spirit  that  comes  looking  for  witness?  Instead  of 
telling  a  man  what  he  "  ought  "  to  believe,  we  should 
point  him  to  the  facts.  We  should  point  to  Christ, 
to  the  saints,  we  should  try  to  show  him  the  way  in 
his  own  life,  we  should  say,  "  Come  and  see  I  " 

Phillips  Brooks  once  spoke  of  "  the  disposition  that 
prevails  everywhere  to  deal  with  things  from  the  out- 
side, discussing  their  relations,  examining  their  na- 
ture, and  not  putting  ourselves  into  their  power." 
The  proper  task  of  the  preacher  is  less  to  argue  about 
Christian  truth,  as  something  in  need  of  subtle  de- 
fense, than  to  make  vivid  and  real  the  beauty  of  holi- 
ness, the  nobility  of  Christ's  message,  its  summons 
and  its  peace.  If  one  deals  in  the  abstract  argu- 
ments, pro  and  con,  the  arguments  con  may,  not  sel- 
dom, make  more  of  an  appeal  than  the  arguments 
pro;  while  to  fail  to  give  the  arguments  on  both  sides 
is  unfair  play,  an  illegitimate  use  of  the  platform  or 
pen,  and  yields  at  best  but  a  temporary  advantage. 
In  any  case,  a  suspicion  is  aroused  by  much  argu- 
mentation that  Christianity  is  throughout  a  specula- 
tive and  debatable  matter,  with  nothing  empirical 
about  it.  This  is  a  very  unfortunate  and  needless 
result.  There  is  much  that  is  unquestionable  in 
Christianity  —  unquestionable  not  only  by  Christians, 
but  by  anybody  with  any  maturity  of  experience.  Of 
these  fundamental  truths  —  which  may  not  be  en- 
tirely peculiar  to  Christianity,  but  have  at  least  been 
by  it  best  expressed  and  most  persistently  taught  — 
we  may  say  with  Emerson,  "  There  is  a  statement  of 
religion  that  makes  all  skepticism  absurd." 

These  verifiable  truths  of  our  faith  are  also  the  most 
practically  important  and  vital  truths.  It  is,  then, 
a  mistake  to  obscure  their  importance  and  the  fact 


WHAT  HAVE  WE  THAT  IS  CERTAIN?  91 

of  their  verifiability  by  mingling  them  inextricably  in 
our  creeds  with  our  inferences,  our  hypotheses,  and 
our  hopes.  These  latter  may  be  precious  to  us,  they 
mav  be  true ;  but  it  is  a  tactical  error  to  refuse  to  dis- 
criminate.  The  Church  should  put  into  prominence 
the  verifiable  truths  and  offer  them  first  to  those  she 
would  bring  into  her  fold.  She  should  say  to  the 
world :  "  Come  with  us  and  see  certain  things  that 
we  see;  try  certain  ways  of  doing  things  that  w^e  find 
good;  get  this  new  perspective  and  valuation;  see  if 
this  practical  Christianity  does  not  seem  worth 
while." 

"  If  any  man  will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  him- 
self and  take  up  his  cross  and  follow  me."  The 
preaching  of  the  cross,  of  self-denial,  was  to  the 
Greeks  foolishness,  as  Paul  discovered.  Was  it  fool- 
ishness, or  was  it  the  highest  wisdom?  Any  wide 
study  of  human  experience  show^s  conclusively,  I  be- 
lieve, that,  though  it  is  subject  to  distortion  and  ex- 
cess, the  teaching  of  Christ  and  of  Paul  on  this  matter 
is  one  of  the  great  truths  of  the  spiritual  life.  E7it' 
hehren  sollst  du  — "  Eenunciation  must  thou  make  " 
—  even  the  worldly  Goethe  felt  it.  We  must  lose  our 
lives  really  to  find  them;  only  through  self-sacrifice 
can  we  come  to  a  great  and  lasting  happiness.  There 
are  two  ways  to  become  convinced  of  this.  One  is  to 
study  the  lives  of  great  men,  past  and  present,  and 
see  which  attained  to  a  wide  happiness  and  a  genuine 
success.  The  other  is  to  try  both  methods,  the  worldly 
and  the  Christian,  oneself.  This  practically  means 
trying  the  Christian  method,  since  our  natural  in- 
stincts have  probably  led  us  all  to  a  trial  of  the 
worldly  method  quite  sufficient  to  reveal  its  super- 
ficiality and  unsatisfactoriness.  A  Nietzsche  or  a 
Schopenhauer,  some  over-egotistical  or  wild-fancied 


92  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

eccentric,  and  many  a  hot-blooded  youth,  may  reject 
the  lessons  of  history  and  experience,  but  the  norm.al 
and  mature  man  can  not  but  yield  his  assent  to  the 
Christian  paradox  of  renunciation. 

This  great  truth  may  be  accepted  at  the  outset 
on  the  authority  of  Christ,  as  one  who  knows  more 
than  we  of  these  spiritual  truths.  In  many  matters 
we  have  to  live  temporarily  by  faith,  not  by  sight ;  and 
on  whom  can  w^e  lean  for  religious  insight,  if  not  on 
him  ?  But  in  the  end  we  shall  not  need  to  take  it  on  his 
authority,  or  on  that  of  the  Bible  or  the  Church.  It 
is  wrong,  then,  for  the  Church  to  point  merely  to 
authorities ;  she  must  never  let  the  world  forget  that 
behind  her  revered  words  of  Scripture,  her  precious 
teachings  of  Christ,  lie  the  great  facts  of  human  ex- 
perience which  prove  them  true. 

Just  as  with  the  teaching  of  renunciation,  is  it  with 
the  teachings  of  purity  and  service,  which  bulk  so 
large  in  the  gospels.  These  two  things,  taken  to- 
gether, constitute  "  pure  religion  and  undefiled  " — 
"  to  visit  the  fatherless  and  widows  in  their  afflic- 
tion "  (which  was  the  local  form  that  the  spirit  of 
loving  service  took)  and  "  to  keep  oneself  unspotted 
from  the  world."  Both  of  these  great  secrets  of  life 
run  counter  to  the  natural  inclinations  of  man,  and 
require  a  certain  conversion  or  turnabout,  a  certain 
regeneration  or  rebirth.  The  natural  man  is  lustful 
and  self-indulgent,  selfish  and  callous  to  the  needs  of 
others.  In  the  heyday  of  his  strength  he  may  scorn 
the  Christian  teaching  as  goody-goody,  fit  only  for 
milksops  and  parsons.  But  the  mature  experience 
of  life  is  against  him.  Why  is  it  that  generation 
after  generation  has  to  learn  these  truths  for  itself 
by  bitter  experience?  It  is  mainly,  of  course,  owing 
to  the  impulsive  nature  of  man,  impatient  of  re- 


WHAT  HAVE  WE  THAT  IS  CERTAIN?  93 

straint,  loath  to  learn  from  others.  But  in  some  de- 
gree it  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  these  most  vital  of 
all  truths  have  been  taught  to  a  skeptical  generation 
too  often  as  the  pronouncements  of  authority  rather 
than  as  verified  by  centuries  of  repeated  human  ex- 
perience. 

Is  it  so  with  the  belief  in  God?  Absolutely,  yes. 
Arguments  from  design,  from  the  necessity  of  a  first 
cause,  and  the  rest  of  the  older  theological  stock-in- 
trade,  are  of  about  as  much  use  in  propagating 
Christianity  to-day  as  the  text-books  of  a  generation 
ago  are  in  teaching  physics.  Of  vastly  more  value  is 
it  to  adopt  here  also  the  empirical  method,  to  point  to 
God  as  revealed  in  nature,  in  the  lives  of  the  saints, 
preeminently  in  Christ,  but  also  as  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
each  of  our  hearts.  God  is  not  to  be  blindly  believed 
in  because  the  belief  is  so  sweet,  and  atheism  so  sad, 
nor  to  be  accepted  as  the  result  of  acute  and  ingenious 
reasoning.  God  is  to  be  seen  in  human  life,  to  be 
loved,  to  be  worshiped.  One  must,  of  course,  have 
one's  eyes  opened  to  this  kind  of  use,  one's  spiritual 
vision  must  be  trained;  God  will  never  be  found  by 
men  who  are  accustomed  to  look  everywhere  for  pri- 
vate advantage,  for  sense-enjoyment  or  worldly  profit. 
It  is  the  pure  in  heart  that  see  God.  And  the  seeker 
must  know  what  he  is  looking  for.  He  will  not  find 
a  great  King  sitting  on  a  throne,  arbitrarily  interfer- 
ing in  the  affairs  of  men  to  manifest  his  glory.  What 
he  will  find  is  a  great  Heart  of  goodness  in  the  world, 
a  great  Power  making  for  righteousness  and  all  good, 
in  spite  of  the  rebelliousness  and  sin  of  individual 
men ;  a  Power  that  can  enter  the  soul  that  yields  itself 
and  save  it  from  the  clutch  of  sin.  If  he  listens,  he 
will  hear  the  voice  of  God  in  his  heart  —  not  neces- 
sarily an  auditory  sensation,  an  actual  voice  (though 


94  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

that  it  may  be  ^),  but  a  guidance  of  some  sort,  a  com- 
mand, a  beacon  light,  in  whatever  psychological  stuff 
it  may  clothe  itself  —  which  he  will  know  to  be  the 
Voice  of  God  because  it  will  lead  him  to  peace  and 
joy,  and  harmony  with  the  great  Heart  of  good  that 
surrounds  his  individual  life. 

Many  questions  may,  indeed,  arise  concerning  the 
nature  of  God  which  it  is  not  within  the  power  of  ex- 
perience to  settle.  All  the  truths  about  God  that  may 
lie  beyond  our  experience  are  not  verifiable,  and  with 
regard  to  them  we  must  either  be  agnostic,  or  live  by 
faith,  or  trust  in  those  spiritual  seers  that  we  may 
believe  to  have  a  vision  more  penetrating  than  our 
own.  But  a  man  who  looks  for  evidence  can  find  a 
revelation  of  God  within  his  own  horizon  ample  for 
his  practical  needs  And  for  fuller  knowledge  of 
God  he  can,  if  need  be,  be  content  to  wait.^ 

It  needs  no  abstruse  reasoning,  either,  to  show  the 
actual,  if  gradual,  and  often  thwarted,  coming  of  the 
Kingdom  of  God  on  earth  —  that  reign  of  righteous- 
ness and  peace  which  Christ  foretold  and  for  which 
he  bade  men  prepare.  The  faith  in  and  the  working 
for  this  new  age,  when  injustice  and  cruelty  and  sin 
should  be  done  away,  was  the  central  feature  of 
Christ's  teaching,  and  is  receiving  at  last  a  revived 
emphasis  from  the  Church.  It  is  surely  the  assur- 
ance of  and  the  dedication  of  effort  for  this  bettered 
human  life  that  gives  our  daily  humdrum,  sin-maimed 
existence  its  greatest  worth,  and  enables  us  to  bear 
the  pain  of  the  present.  We  may  have  to  restate  our 
hopes  and  our  duties  in  modern  language ;  the  phrase- 

1  For  cases,  see  William  James'  Varieties  of  Religious  Experience. 
Such  cases  are,  of  course,  unusual. 

2  If  the  writer  may  be  pardoned  for  another  reference  to  his  own 
book  —  this  matter  will  be  found  more  fully  discussed  in  Prohlems 
of  Religion,  Chap.  IX,  The  God  of  Experience. 


WHAT  HAVE  WE  THAT  IS  CERTAIN?  95 

ology  intelligible  and  moving,  to  the  Jew  of  the  first 
century,  with  its  local  flavor  and  provincial  note, 
needs  reinterpretation  to  meet  our  needs.  We  are 
too  democratic  to  like  the  term  Kingdom,  and  the 
eschatologsy  of  the  Jews  seems  in  our  wider  perspec- 
tive somewhat  grotesque  and  over-impatient.  But 
the  great  hope  and  the  great  duty  that  flamed  in  Jesus' 
gospel  can  still  fire  our  hearts.  And  the  kingdom  is 
coming  "  with  observation,"  though  it  is  not  so  much  a 
"  Lo,  here !  "  or  "  Lo,  there ! ''  that  reveals  it  as  the 
long  vista  of  history.  Pessimism  is  shallow  observa- 
tion. Great  as  is  yet  the  evil  in  human  life,  ameliora- 
tion is  real.  And  every  man  knows  in  his  heart  that 
his  duty  is  to  work  with  those  who  are  battling  with 
the  evil  and  helping  to  bring  in  the  new  time. 

The  necessity  and  duty  of  renunciation,  of  personal 
purity  and  loving  service,  the  reality  of  God,  the  faith 
in  and  ardor  for  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
on  earth  —  these  are  the  keynotes  of  Christ's  teach- 
ing. What  later  Christianity  has  added  has  been 
chiefly  its  recognition  of  Christ  as  the  great  revealer 
of  God  and  spiritual  truth,  and  its  reverent  devotion 
to  him.  This  is,  indeed,  an  indispensable  aspect  of 
the  religion.  In  him  we  find,  made  concrete  and  liv- 
ing and  appealing,  the  truths  that  when  abstractedly 
grasped  lack  power  and  poignancy  for  the  soul. 
Christianity  is,  for  many  people,  first  of  all  a  personal 
loyalty  to  Christ. 

But  it  is  not  because  Christ  is  known  by  super- 
natural revelation  to  be  a  superhuman  being,  not  be- 
cause he  is  known  to  have  been  born  of  a  virgin,  and 
to  have  risen  from  the  dead,  that  w^e  give  him  our 
allegiance;  it  is  because  the  collective  experience  of 
his  followers  and  the  verdict  of  our  own  individual 
experience   justifies   and   verifies   his   teaching.     No 


96  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

series  of  portents  and  miracles  would  lead  us  to  Mm 
if  that  teaching  were  coarse  and  low.  His  divinity 
consists  in  the  fact  that  he  was  able  to  attain  our  ideal 
for  human  nature.  Whatever  extraordinary  physical 
powers  he  may  have  possessed,  his  divineness  lay  in 
his  character  and  conduct.  It  matters  little  for  prac- 
tical purposes  how  strong,  or  how  weak,  is  the  evi- 
dence for  the  gospel  miracles.  Certainly,  in  these 
times,  the  less  the  Church  thrusts  them  upon  the 
would-be  convert,  the  better;  they  are  as  apt  to  breed 
distrust  as  trust.  The  important  thing  is  to  help  him 
to  see  the  purity,  the  power,  the  challenge,  the  heroism 
of  Jesus'  life ;  to  awaken  his  reverence,  love,  and  alle- 
giance, and  the  desire  to  follow  in  his  steps.  Was 
Christ  divine?  Does  he  rightly  deserve  discipleship? 
Do  not  argue  it,  bid  him  come  and  see.  In  the 
normal  man  a  candid  and  thorough  studv  of  the  life 
of  Christ  will  be  pretty  sure  to  breed  the  same  feel- 
ing of  reverence  that  the  sight  of  his  serenity  in  the 
agony  of  death  brought  to  the  heart  of  the  centurion 
— "  Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  God ! '' —  or,  as  we 
should  more  properly  translate  the  phrase,  "  Truly 
this  was  a  Divine  Man." 

So  far,  then,  the  Christian  teachings  may  welcome 
the  spirit  of  doubt  and  inquiry,  confident  of  proving 
themselves  true  the  more  firmly  with  each  thorough 
investigation.  But  we  must  freely  confess  that  there 
is  one  great  hope  of  Christianity  which  outleaps  our 
present  evidence,  the  hope  of  personal  immortality. 
We  may  feel  that  certain  of  the  current  arguments 
are  strong,  we  may  pin  our  trust  to  the  statements  of 
Christ  —  though  they  are  few  and  obscure;  we  may 
cleave  to  Paul's  fuller  but  rather  antiquated  argu- 
ment; we  may  hold  the  belief  as  a  corollary  of  our 
faith  in  God,  or  we  may  simiDly  leave  it  as  a  belief,  a 


WHAT  HAVE  WE  THAT  IS  CERTAIN?  97 

hope,  that  outruns  the  evidence.  In  any  case,  let  us 
by  all  means  believe,  if  we  can;  let  us  urge  belief  in 
what  most  men  need  to  believe  in  for  their  encourage- 
ment and  consolation.  But  let  us  not  pretend  that 
this,  too,  lies  within  the  range  of  present  proof.  To 
thrust  it  upon  a  candid  and  hesitating  inquirer  before 
he  has  been  won  to  the  Christian  life  is  sometimes  to 
alienate  him  even  from  the  truths  that  are  firmly  sup- 
ported by  evidence. 

In  short,  to  lump  all  the  traditional  Christian 
teachings  together  as  equally  coercive  to  the  intellect 
is  to  do  grave  injustice  to  the  strength  of  the  really 
empirical  truths ;  the  critic  is  sure  to  pounce  upon  the 
least  fortified  doctrine,  and  in  the  exposure  of  its  em- 
pirical weakness  all  will  suffer.  On  the  other  hand, 
we  need  not  fear  to  acknowledge  that  in  this  matter 
or  that  —  as  in  so  many  other  matters  than  religion  — 
we  believe  where  we  can  not  prove.  Such  a  candid 
admission  disarms  the  critic,  and  brings  into  relief 
the  fact  that  we  can  prove  so  much.  For  the  prac- 
tically important  features  of  a  liberal  Christian  faith 
stand  within  the  limits  of  the  indisputable;  and  if  at 
one  point  or  other  our  faith  reaches  beyond  our  sight, 
the  most  scrupulous  intellect  need  take  no  shame 
therein.  Indeed,  however,  it  is,  for  most  of  us,  a  waste 
of  time  to  think  too  much  about  the  future  or  the 
remote.  Sufficient  unto  the  day  is  the  good  thereof, 
and  the  work  thereof.  What  is  essential  in  Chris- 
tianity deals  with  the  here  and  now. 


CHAPTER  NINE 

EVOLUTION    IN    RELIGION 

However  we  may  feel  about  the  traditional  the- 
ology of  Christianity,  we  must  never  forget  that  ours 
is  a  living  and  growing  religion.  The  static  concep- 
tion of  Christianity  is  its  worst  enemy.  If  current 
Christian  theology  seems  to  us  partly  dubious  or  un- 
true, we  are  free,  as  were  the  Christian  thinkers  of  the 
past,  to  revise,  expurgate,  reformulate  its  expression. 

It  may  be  a  source  of  encouragement  and  sugges- 
tion to  note  the  forces  which  are  visibly  at  work, 
moulding  human  religions,  including  our  own,  to- 
wards the  type  of  greatest  usefulness  to  man. 

Of  the  countless  varieties  of  historic  and  prehis- 
toric religion  only  a  few  have  survived  to  our  day. 
These  represent  a  long  development,  and  are  still  in 
process  of  change.  Can  we  discern  any  dominant 
causes  that  have  brought  about  the  survival  of  just 
these  religions  and  determined  their  growth  in  just 
these  directions;  or  deduce  from  our  survey  of  the 
past  their  probable  future  direction  of  growth? 

It  is  no  explanation  to  assume  the  unfolding  of  a 
universally  present  "  religious  instinct."  Religious 
evolution  is  not  a  self-contained  process,  bearing 
within  itself  its  own  explanation,  as  an  acorn  con- 
tains the  germ  of  all  that  the  oak  is  to  be.  There  is 
no  single  religious  instinct.  Rather,  there  have  been 
innumerable  forces  at  work  producing  continually 
new  variations  in  ideal  and  belief.     Of  these  a  few 

98 


EVOLUTION  IN  RELIGION  99 

have  outlived  the  others.  It  is  a  plain  case  of  sur- 
vival of  the  fittest. 

We  must  discriminate  between  originating  causes 
of  religious  variations  and  survival-causes.  The 
former  have  been  too  numerous  even  to  summarize 
here.  They  are  to  be  understood  in  terms  of  con- 
temporary social  and  intellectual  changes.  What- 
ever activities  and  ideas  are  vital  in  the  life  of  any 
tribe  or  nation  are  seen  to  be  reflected  in  religious 
practices.  A  religion  may  veer  in  any  direction  under 
the  influence  of  the  fortunes  of  the  people,  their 
changing  science  and  philosophy,  their  political  and 
cultural  status,  the  conscious  or  unconscious  manipu- 
lation of  priests.  The  dominance  of  this  cult  or  that 
has  been  determined  largely  hy  the  physical  superior- 
ity of  the  conquering  nations.  And  then,  great  per- 
sonalities have  moulded  the  religion  of  their  country- 
men in  the  direction  of  their  personal  visions  and 
convictions.  In  short,  all  sorts  of  forces,  pushing  in 
all  sorts  of  directions,  have  reinforced  or  opposed  one 
another,  and  in  this  locality  or  that  have  produced 
almost  every  sort  of  imaginable  faith. 

Yet  underlying  this  tangle  of  forces  there  has  been, 
on  the  whole,  a  drift  in  certain  definite  directions ;  a 
few  constant  causes  have  determined,  in  the  long  run, 
which  of  the  many  competing  cults  should  survive. 
In  the  end,  those  varieties  of  religion  seem  likely  to 
prevail  which  best  meet  three  deep-rooted  human 
needs:  the  need  for  consolation,  for  inspiration,  and 
for  comprehension.  Conceptions  and  practices  which 
are  more  cheering  and  hope-giving,  those  which  are 
more  moral  or  spiritual  (i.e.,  lead  the  believer  into 
the  better  ways  of  life),  and  those  which  are  more 
rational  (i.e.,  more  in  harmony  with  unprejudiced 
observation  of  what  is  true  or  probable),  have  an 


100  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

inherent  stability  which  is  lacking  to  the  gloomy  or 
fearful  beliefs,  to  the  lower  ideals,  or  to  the  more 
fantastic  conceptions. 

These  three  survival-causes  cannot  produce  the 
higher  varieties  of  religion ;  they  simply  operate,  like 
the  forces  that  Darwin  discovered  at  work  among  or- 
ganic forms,  to  preserve  and  spread  such  few  among 
the  many  variations  as  are  best  fitted  to  survive.  It 
is  exactly  so,  of  course,  in  the  field  of  morals,  in  the 
field  of  art,  in  every  field  where  change  is  at  work. 
Forces  largely  irrational,  irrelevant  to  the  values  pro- 
duced, keep  new  species  forever  emerging;  but  their 
rationale^  their  value,  determines  in  the  end  which  of 
them  shall  remain  in  existence. 

Let  us  illustrate  this  threefold  process  of  natural 
selection.  And  first,  the  survival-value  of  the  ele- 
ment of  consolation  in  a  religion.  Why  have  most 
Christians  ceased  to  believe  in  original  sin,  in  hell,  in 
the  Calvinistic  type  of  God,  who  grimly  damns  the 
great  majority  of  his  helpless  creatures  to  eternal  tor- 
ment? Not  because  of  the  discovery  of  a  lack  of 
logic  in  the  arguments  of  those  who  preached  these 
doctrines ;  few  who  reject  them  to-day  could  say  what 
those  arguments  were.  They  are  not  interested  in  the 
arguments,  because,  argument  or  no  argument,  their 
souls  refuse  to  entertain  the  beliefs;  they  are  too  de- 
pressing. Gloomy  beliefs  may  long  ride  men,  like 
a  nightmare ;  but  sooner  or  later  they  must  succumb 
to  more  buoyant  views.  Men  crave  consolation,  men 
want  to  hope;  and  they  will  not  forever  be  satisfied 
with  world-views  that  cross  this  fundamental  need. 

Buddhism  may  perhaps  be  cited  as  a  pessimistic 
religion  that  has  survived.  But  Buddhism  is  not 
pessimistic  in  relation  to  the  religions  it  conquered. 
It  was  a  religion  of  deliverance  from  the  depressing 


EVOLUTION  IN  RELIGION  101 

world-view  prevalent  at  its  inception;  it  has  been  a 
vast  comfort  to  millions  who  without  it  would  have 
known  no  hope  of  escape  from  the  pitiless  round 
of  unhappy  reincarnations.  And  Buddhism  to-day, 
when  confronted  with  Christianity,  is  relatively  un- 
stable, in  large  measure  owing  to  the  latter's  larger 
and  more  vigorous  faith. 

The  rapidity  with  which  primitive  Christianity 
spread,  like  a  prairie  fire,  over  the  parched  and  hope- 
starved  Roman  empire  was  due,  among  many  causes, 
to  the  great  hope  that  it  offered.  Few  stopped  to  ex- 
amine proofs,  few  were  capable  of  appraising  the  evi- 
dence by  which  its  assertions  were  supported.  It  was 
accepted  as  thirsty  men  accept  a  draught  of  water. 
A  new  value  was  at  once  added  to  life;  its  accidents 
became  unimportant  in  the  light  of  the  future. 
Christ,  the  Good  Shepherd,  came  closer  to  the  heart 
than  the  Jewish  Jehovah,  and  far  closer  than  the  cold 
and  impersonal  God  of  Greek  philosophy,  offering  a 
more  intimate  personal  relationship  and  a  more  beau- 
tiful hope  in  the  beyond.  The  old  order  was  soon 
coming  to  naught,  the  New  Age  at  hand.  It  is  small 
wonder  if  these  Christians  went  about  with  radiant 
faces  and  rejoicing  hearts,  drawing  gradually  to  their 
fold  those  that  labored  and  were  heavy  laden,  seeking 
the  rest  that  Christ  had  promised  to  those  who  fol- 
lowed him. 

Another  example  of  the  survival-value  of  optimism 
in  a  religion  is  to  be  found  in  the  growth  and  spread 
of  monotheism.  The  line  of  development  from  poly- 
theism to  monotheism  is  not  a  highway  along  which 
mankind  as  a  whole  has  advanced.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  only  in  a  few  exceptional  cases  that  such  an 
evolution  occurred.  But  when  a  monotheistic  belief 
had  once  become  anywhere  firmly  established,  it  was 


102  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

almost  certain  ultimately  to  outstrip  and  overcome 
its  rivals.  For  polytheism,  though  a  more  natural 
and  instinctive  reaction  to  the  complex  and  often  op- 
posed forces  of  nature,  leaves  the  mind  confused  and 
hope  uncertain.  However  favorably  disposed  a  god 
may  be,  his  power  is  limited  by  that  of  other  and  per- 
haps less  beneficent  beings.  Athene,  for  example, 
was  sure  to  work  for  the  city  that  bore  her  name ;  but 
Hera's  power  was  also  to  be  reckoned  with.  Jehovah 
would  fight  for  his  tribes,  but  so  would  Baal  and 
Chemosh  for  theirs.  Only  when  the  belief  should 
grow^  up  of  a  single  God  of  all  peoples,  all-powerful 
and  beneficent,  could  men  feel  wholly  confident  in  his 
strength. 

Actually,  a  monotheistic  belief  developed  in  several 
places,  uuder  the  influence  of  qcAte  different  causes. 
But  the  monotheism  of  the  Greeks  was  too  specula- 
tive, too  lacking  in  roots  in  the  soil,  to  spread  far  be- 
yond the  circle  of  the  educated  or  survive  the  over- 
throw of  Hellenic  culture.  The  monotheism  (if  it 
may  be  so  called)  of  the  Brahmanic  priests  was  like- 
wise too  speculative,  too  lacking  in  warmth  of  human 
interests  and  idealism,  so  that  it  waned  before  the 
more  spiritual  atheism  of  Buddha  —  though  it  is 
noteworthy  that  the  hunger  for  a  God  to  trust  in 
quickly  found  another  object  in  the  worship  of  Bud- 
dha himself. 

In  any  case,  the  monotheism  of  ultimate  impor- 
tance to  the  world  was  that  which  developed  within 
the  Hebrew  religion.  The  process  of  development 
can  be  readily  traced  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  is  now 
familiar  to  all  students  who  approach  it  in  the  mod- 
ern historical  spirit.  The  enhancement  of  Jehovah's 
powers  until  he  came  to  be  thought  of  as  the  only  God 
worthy  of  worship,  and  finally  as  the  only  existing 


EVOLUTION  IN  RELIGION  103 

God,  was  a  process  close  to  the  practical  life  of  men ; 
it  was  linked  with  historical  and  local  events,  and 
brought  into  play  the  patriotism  and  moral  power  of 
an  intense  and  ardent  people.  Instead  of  offering  a 
vague  hope,  such  as  we  find  in  Marcus  Aurelius,  that 
events  are  ultimately  governed  by  reason  and  there- 
fore to  be  patiently,  even  loyally,  acquiesced  in,  it 
brought,  in  its  eventual  form,  a  pledge  to  the  indi- 
vidual of  the  fulfilment  of  his  personal  hopes  and 
longings.  A  belief  so  inspiring  as  this  found  ready 
and  tenacious  acceptance ;  given  favorable  conditions, 
it  was  bound  to  extend  its  infiuence  far. 

But  if  religion  owes  its  origin  and  actual  develop- 
ment in  part  to  man's  need  of  deliverance  from  the 
fear  of  the  Powers  behind  nature,  and  his  longing  for 
a  hopeful  view  of  his  life  and  destiny,  it  also  in  part 
owes  the  course  of  its  development  to  his  need  of  de- 
liverance from  himself,  from  his  restlessness  and 
cross-purposes,  from  his  weight  of  selfishness  and  sin. 
The  pleasures  which  he  seeks  too  often  turn  to  ashes 
in  his  hands ;  the  passions  that  lure  him  on  leave  him 
dissatisfied ;  he  is  the  victim  of  his  own  impulses  and 
longings,  often  impotent  to  control  his  own  soul  and 
without  any  satisfaction  for  his  bewildered  heart. 
In  a  happy  environment,  as,  for  a  brief  period,  among 
the  classic  Greeks,  he  may  live  in  the  moment  and 
avoid  any  marked  revulsion  of  spirit.  But  in  a  less 
healthy-minded  community,  as  throughout  the  Greco- 
Koman  world  at  the  advent  of  Christianity,  or,  earl- 
ier, in  India  at  the  advent  of  Buddhism,  there  is  an 
insistent  craving  for  a  higher  and  more  spiritual  life. 
Any  religion  that  links  with  its  assurance  of  hope 
high  moral  ideals  is  so  much  the  more  likely  to  win 
converts,  off'ering  to  them  the  prize  of  purity  and 
loyalty  and  self-forgetting  service,  which  alone  can 


104  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

lift  the  human  heart  above  internal  discord  and  dis- 
illusion and  give  life  dignity  and  lasting  joy. 

Examples  of  this  survival-value  of  moral  idealism 
in  a  religion  can  be  found  on  every  hand  —  in  the 
triumph  of  Zoroastrianism,  Buddhism,  Christianity, 
Mohammedanism,  over  the  faiths  they  respectively 
superseded,  or  in  the  dominance  of  those  pagan  cults 
that  symbolized  and  enshrined  patriotism  and  civic 
loyalty.  We  are  prone  to  forget  this  earnest  and 
deeply  moral  aspect  of  the  pagan  religions.  But,  like 
loyalty  to  flag  or  sovereign  to-day,  loyalty  to  the  gods 
and  goddesses  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  states  was  a 
symbolic  and  imaginative  way  of  expressing  the  com- 
munity spirit,  which  drew  men  out  of  their  selfishness, 
gave  them  something  great  and  self-transcending  to 
live  for,  and  spurred  them  to  courage  and  discipline 
and  effort.  One  who  reads  the  Annals  of  Plutarch 
sees  there  what  splendid  devotion  this  civic  religion 
bred;  one  w^ho  hears  of  the  Spartan  lads,  from  their 
childhood  living  for  the  larger  life  of  w^hich  they 
were  a  part  —  not  only  ready,  if  necessary,  to  die  for 
their  country,  but  undergoing  a  daily  discipline  and 
self-denial  for  her  —  can  never  speak  of  such  ex- 
amples of  the  pagan  religion  without  reverence  and  a 
touch  of  wistful  regret.  Higher  though  the  Christian 
religion  is  in  most  of  its  ideals,  it  has  never  yet 
evolved  so  intense  a  social  consciousness  as  had  flour- 
ished for  a  time  in  the  ancient  world. 

This  civic  virtue  had,  however,  disappeared  through 
the  operation  of  various  forces,  before  Christianity 
began  her  triumphal  march  westward.  And  her  con- 
quest of  the  West  was  due,  if  in  part  to  the  vigor  of 
her  faith,  in  large  part  also  to  the  New  Life  which 
was  linked  with  this  Great  Hope  and  its  witness. 
Already  the  Kingdom  of  God  was  in  a  sense  present, 


EVOLUTION  IN  RELIGION  105 

in  the  hearts  of  the  faithful,  a  redemption  from  the 
vanity  and  sin  of  the  existing  order.  Instead  of  the 
exaltation  of  might,  the  pride  of  power,  the  wanton- 
ness of  luxury,  the  new  teaching  enjoined  patience, 
humility,  purity,  simplicity  of  life.  The  primitive 
church  was  an  intimate  brotherhood,  caring  for  the 
poor  and  the  weak  in  its  membership,  showing  kind- 
ness to  all,  and  rejoicing  in  its  discovery  of  the  glory 
of  self-forgetting  love  and  service.  As  the  high  ideal- 
ism of  the  Prophets,  some  centuries  before,  had  leav- 
ened Judaism,  transforming  it  from  a  semi-barbarous 
cult  into  a  religion  whose  dominant  note  was  the 
vigorous  pursuit  of  personal  and  national  righteous- 
ness, so  that  religion,  sweetened  and  further  spiritual- 
ized by  Jesus,  now  began  to  leaven  the  pagan  world. 
It  could  not  retain  its  original  fervor  and  purity  — 
religious  progress  comes  in  waves,  with  long  troughs 
between  the  crests  —  but  it  has  been  the  greatest 
power  in  the  world  since  that  day  for  the  moralization 
of  man. 

It  would  be  easy  to  analyze  these  recurrent  waves 
of  reform  within  the  church,  and  note  how  generally 
the  moral  note  was  predominant.  St.  Francis, 
Luther,  Wesley,  Channing  —  the  great  leaders  that 
have  swayed  Christian  thought  have  been  men  of 
deeper  moral  insight  than  their  contemporaries,  men 
who  have  called  their  fellows  to  a  better  life,  and  re- 
jected current  doctrines  not  so  often  for  their  incon- 
sonance  with  fact  as  for  their  relative  immorality. 
The  Protestant  Reformation,  for  example,  was  pri- 
marily a  moral  protest,  and  the  Unitarian  movement 
in  America  largely  a  revulsion  from  the  immoral  con- 
ception of  God  taught  by  the  then  current  Calvinism. 
If  space  allowed,  it  would  be  profitable  to  point  out 
liow  such  concepts  as  "  sacrifice  "  and  "  sin  "  have  de- 


106  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

veloped  from  non-moral  beginnings  a  significance  so 
deeply  moral  that  we  have  almost  forgotten  their  orig- 
inal meaning.  On  the  whole,  and  in  spite  of  eddies 
in  the  current,  it  is  clear  that,  other  things  being 
equal,  the  religions,  and  the  types  of  a  given  religion, 
which  tend  to  win  the  day  are  those  of  higher  moral 
vision. 

The  reasonableness  of  a  religion  —  the  third  of  our 
survival-causes  —  has  counted  for  much  less  histori- 
cally. The  protests  of  cultivated  Greeks,  to  whom 
the  gospel  was  naturally  "  foolishness  " —  a  ^dpf^apov 
Soy/xa  —  availed  naught  against  the  insf^iring  and  con- 
soling values  of  the  new  faith.  And  although  Chris- 
tian doctors  have  never  ceased,  from  the  outset,  to 
justify  their  beliefs  to  the  intellect  with  ever-vary- 
ing and  often  elaborately  ingenious  logic,  the  his- 
torian perceives  that  the  faith  was  primary  and  the 
reasoning  secondary.  The  most  grotesque  and,  one 
would  suppose,  obviously  irrational  dogmas  never 
lacked  intellectual  backing,  and  scarcely  suffered 
from  their  remoteness  from  the  realm  of  observed 
fact.  Reason  is  the  latest  developed  of  man's  powers ; 
and  except  for  a  brief  brilliant  period  in  Greece,  and 
now  in  quite  recent  times,  the  irrationality  of  a  belief 
has  been  a  hardly  appreciable  handicap. 

The  rationality  of  a  religion  is  rapidly  becoming, 
however,  of  decisive  importance.  The  scientific 
temper  that  demands  evidence  for  proffered  beliefs 
is  infecting  our  biblical  studies  and  our  theological 
discussions.  And  just  as  among  the  later  Greeks  and 
Romans  the  old  religions,  with  all  their  poetry  and 
social  value,  crumbled  before  the  merciless  analysis 
of  a  rising  intellectual  temper,  so  to-day  the  tradi- 
tional dogmas  of  Christianity  are  being  subjected  to 
the  criticism  of  an  impartial  and  cautious  logic.     We 


EVOLUTION  IN  RELIGION  107 

are  prone  to  forget  how  recent  this  scientific  attitude 
toward  religion  is,  in  any  widespread  degree.  Bishop 
Butler  threw  a  bombshell  when  he  declared  that 
"  reason  is  the  only  faculty  with  which  we  have  to 
judge  concerning  anything,  even  revelation  itself." 
And  Channing,  less  than  a  hundred  years  ago,  shocked 
the  pious  by  his  attitude  toward  the  faith,  expressed 
in  such  statements  as,  "  If  religion  be  the  shipwreck 
of  understanding,  we  cannot  keep  too  far  from  it," 
or,  ^'  If  I  could  not  be  a  Christian  without  ceasing  to 
be  rational,  I  should  not  hesitate  as  to  my  choice." 

This  scientific  spirit,  with  its  insistent  demand  for 
evidence,  is  diminishing  the  power  which  the  bright- 
ness of  a  religion's  faith  has  to  insure  its  spread, 
while  it  increases  the  survival-value  of  its  consonance 
with  observed  fact.  To  be  sure,  as  the  influence  of 
William  James'  will-to-believe  doctrine  shows,  or  the 
popularity  of  Bergson's  philosophy  with  a  public  who 
comprehend  little  more  than  its  vaguely  optimistic 
purport,  any  faith  that  promises  much  and  assures 
discouraged  hearts  of  what  they  would  fain  believe 
will  always  have  an  enormous  advantage  in  the  com- 
petition of  cults.  But  the  opposition  of  the  Protes- 
tant churches  to  the  crdtical  spirit  is  rapidly  dimin- 
ishing; and  the  ultimate  goal  of  Protestantism  seems 
to  be  the  complete  rationalization  of  its  beliefs,  a 
whole-hearted  acceptance  of  science  as  the  arbiter  of 
truth,  and  the  formulation  of  its  insights  and  ideals 
in  terms  that  science  can  accept.  The  promise  of 
that  eventual  outcome  is  present  in  that  individual 
liberty  of  belief  whose  seeds  were  contained  in  the 
Keformation.  Meanwhile,  all  sorts  of  influences 
within  the  Church  are  at  work  to  raise  the  level  of 
her  moral  teaching  and  restore  her  original  idealism. 
Especially  noteworthy  in  the  last  few  years  is  the 


108  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

movement  toward  a  reincorporation  in  Christian 
teaching  of  the  old  ideals  of  civic  righteousness,  once 
preached  so  memorably  by  the  Hebrew  prophets  but 
long  since  lapsed  from  the  consciousness  of  their 
spiritual  heirs. 

It  seems  safe,  then,  to  predict  that  whatever  cur- 
rents and  cross-currents  may  affect  religious  evolu- 
tion in  the  future,  the  eventual  outcome  is  pretty  sure 
to  be  the  dominance  of  that  religion  which  most  suc- 
cessfully combines  the  three  desiderata — ^  first,  op- 
timism, faith,  a  happy  and  confident  forward  look; 
secondly,  high  moral-spiritual  ideals,  a  passionate 
pursuit  of  righteousness;  and,  thirdly,  consonance 
with  the  teachings  and  spirit  of  science.  A  half-blind 
and  mechanical  process  of  natural  selection  drives  in 
that  direction.  So,  although  our  conscious  efforts  can 
vastly  accelerate  the  process,  we  need  not  despair 
when  they  seem  for  the  moment  futile.  The  mills  of 
God  grind  slowly;  but  that  they  have  long  been  and 
are  still  at  work,  grinding  the  wheat  from  the  chaff, 
in  religion  as  in  everything  else,  a  survey  of  religious 
history  quite  clearly  shows. 


CHAPTER  TE:N' 

WHAT   RELIGIOUS   EDUCATION    MIGHT    BE 

It  is  doubtful  if  there  ever  was  a  time  when  the 
Christian  church  gave  so  great  effort  to  spread  its 
gospel  as  in  these  latter  years.  Yet  interest  in  re- 
ligion has  been,  on  the  whole,  quite  evidently  declin- 
ing; our  generation  has  been  drifting  steadily  away 
from  professed  Christianity.  On  this  continent  the 
situation  has  been  complicated  by  the  difficulty  of 
getting  hold  of  the  immigrants,  who  have  broken  loose 
from  old  ties.  A  majority  of  them  suffer  a  sea  change 
when  they  leave  the  Old  World,  lose  the  faith  of  their 
fathers,  and  get  no  formulated  religion  to  take  its 
place.  A  typical  result  is  that  in  New  York  City 
at  present  over  half  of  the  population  of  Protestant 
antecedents,  over  half  of  Catholic  antecedents,  and 
three  quarters  of  the  Jews  are  "  unchurched," —  have 
no  institutional  connection  with  religion.  Besides 
this,  great  numbers  of  those  who  are  nominally  con- 
nected with  some  church  actually  stay  away  from  it, 
or  might  as  well  for  all  the  benefit  that  accrues  to 
their  religious  life.  In  the  country  the  tenacity  of 
custom  and  the  pressure  of  public  opinion  make  the 
statistics  better.  But  many  a  rural  church  is  no  more 
than  half  alive.  The  situation  everywhere  is,  for 
those  who  love  religion,  unquestionably  serious. 

For  this  decline  of  the  churches  there  are  several 
important  reasons.  One  is  to  be  found  in  the  in- 
creasing richness  of  contemporary  life,  that  has  lured 

109 


110  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

men  away  from  concentration  of  thought  and  wiH 
upon  spiritual  things.  Another  reason  we  have  been 
discussing  —  the  spread  of  the  scientific  spirit,  that 
makes  men  increasingly  impatient  with  unproven 
dogmas  and  the  prescientific  beliefs  set  forth  in  fa- 
miliar creeds.  A  cause  less  commonly  noted  but 
which  we  must  now  consider,  is  the  irrelevance  and 
comparative  futility  of  most  of  our  modern  attempts 
at  the  religious  education  of  youth. 

A  great  deal  of  money  is  being  spent,  and  the  de- 
voted energy  of  multitudes  of  workers  is  being  used, 
in  what  is  currently  called  religious  education.  But 
most  of  this  effort  is  tangential  to  religion,  does  not 
hit  the  bull's-eye ;  it  does  not  affect  the  will,  does  not 
produce  religious  zeal  or  an  appreciably  awakened 
spiritual  life.  The  trouble  lies  partly  in  a  failure  to 
understand  education,  to  utilize  methods  appropriate 
to  the  end  that  is  sought.  But  it  lies  still  oftener  in 
a  failure  to  understand  religion,  to  realize  clearly 
what  is  the  end  that  should,  above  all  else,  be  sought. 

The  pathos  of  the  situation  lies  in  the  fact  that 
the  Church  is  too  often  giving  stones  to  those  who 
hunger  for  bread.  The  hope  of  the  situation  lies  in 
the  equally  undeniable  fact  that  outside  the  churches 
there  is  to  be  seen  a  vital  spirit  of  religion  flaming  in 
the  souls  of  masses  of  men  who  have  never  enrolled 
under  the  banner  of  Christ  and  have  no  love  for  the 
Church.  This  truth,  which  is  a  matter  of  common- 
place observation,  has  recently  been  given  poignant 
expression  in  one  of  the  noblest  and  most  pathetic 
books  which  the  Great  War  produced,  Donald  Han- 
key's  A  Student  in  Arms.  Here  was  a  young  man, 
ardently  Christian  and  deeply  concerned  for  the 
spiritual  life  of  his  comrades,  wrestling  with  the 
problem,  until  he  cried  out  at  last  in  exasperation, 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      HI 

"  How  seldom  does  *  Christian  Education '  teach  one 
anything  worth  knowing  about  Christianity!" 
Hankey  was  killed  in  action,  in  October,  1916;  and 
most  of  the  men  of  whom  he  writes  have  paid,  with 
him,  the  ultimate  price, —  leaving  to  us,  who  have 
been  spared  that  sacrifice,  a  world  to  rebuild.  Of  all 
our  tasks  none  is  more  important  than  that  of  making 
the  age  to  come  more  deeply  and  pervasively  Christian 
than  the  generation  before  the  War. 

A  hundred  writers  have  been  telling  us  of  the  ef- 
fects of  the  War  upon  religion  or  forecasting  this 
result  and  that.  Out  of  their  confused  and  very 
diverse  findings  there  emerges  at  least  this  one  clear 
truth :  great  reserves  of  heroism  and  sacrifice  and 
loyalty  were  called  forth  in  millions  of  human  hearts ; 
and  men  who  had  been  living  for  petty  and  personal 
ends  came  at  last  face  to  face  with  ultimate  realities. 
The  Church  had  not  tapped  these  resources. 

While  the  War  lasted  the  ardor  of  patriotism  to  a 
large  extent  acted  as  a  substitute  for  religion,  taking 
men  out  of  themselves,  giving  them  something  noble 
and  beautiful  for  which  to  live  and  labor  and  die. 
But  this  fever-heat  has  not  long  outlasted  the  War; 
there  has  been  a  slump  to  lower  levels,  now  that  the 
excitement  is  over  and  only  the  dreary  tasks  of  recon- 
struction remain.  Moreover,  patriotism,  for  all  its 
ability  to  exalt  a  commonplace  life,  to  wring  from  it 
cooperative  effort  and  self-transcendence,  is  a  dan- 
gerous stimulant,  easily  degenerating  into  jingoism, 
chauvinism,  pride  of  conquest,  hatred  of  enemy-na- 
tions, unless  it  is  illuminated  and  spiritualized  by 
a  vision  that  covets  for  the  fatherland  true  excellence 
and  not  mere  material  aggrandizement.  In  short, 
whether  national  patriotism  is  to  be  a  force  predomi- 
nantly for  good  or  for  ill  depends  upon  whether  men 


112  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

have  come  to  care  for  the  things  that  are  just  and 
pure  and  lovely  and  of  good  report,  depends  upon 
the  success  of  their  religious  education. 

Is  the  Church  seriously  facing  this  great  oppor- 
tunity? It  is  not  enough  to  say  that  we  are  going  to 
have  a  new  world  as  a  result  of  the  War;  we  must 
make  that  new  world.  Of  the  weapons  that  lie  to  our 
hands,  there  are  three  whose  potentialities  must  be 
more  and  more  utilized  —  legislation,  art,  and  educa- 
tion. 

Legislation  has  been  extending  its  sphere  with  a 
rapidity  that  could  hardly  have  been  imagined  a  gen- 
eration ago;  and  this  new  willingness  to  submit  our 
wilful  individualities  to  social  control,  to  subordinate 
ourselves  to  all  sorts  of  organized  efforts  and  common 
restraints,  has  undoubtedlv  come  to  stav.  The  older 
hit-or-miss,  devil-take-the-hindmost  individualism  is 
vanishing  forever, —  and  good  riddance.  But  while 
legislation  can  banish  alcohol,  stop  child-labor,  and 
rein  in  profiteers,  and  in  many  another  way  bring  us 
nearer  the  Kingdom  of  God,  there  is  one  thing  surely 
that  it  cannot  do  —  it  cannot  make  men  religious. 

Art  is  a  power  that  we  have  hardly  yet  learned  to 
harness.  Here  are  floods  of  emotion  going  to  waste 
over  novels  and  short  stories,  at  the  theatre,  at  con- 
certs, at  the  movies, —  going  to  waste  in  that  they 
produce  no  appreciable  changes  in  conduct.  The 
emotional  life  that  in  the  Middle  Ages  was  largely 
concentrated  on  religion  is  now  so  constantly  tapped 
by  these  secular  stimuli  that  it  is  difficult  to  stir  its 
depths  by  the  comparatively  wan  and  tedious  services 
of  the  Church.  Many  of  the  most  earnest  men  and 
women  of  to-day  turn  for  inspiration  to  the  dramatist, 
the  poet,  the  essayist,  rather  than  to  the  preacher. 
And  with  this  we  should  have  no  quarrel  if  the  in- 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      113 

spiration  caught  from  the  artist  were  enough  for  the 
guiding  and  stabilizing  of  life.  But  these  moments 
of  quickened  emotion,  these  vicarious  heroisms  and 
loves,  pass  quickly  away  and  are  forgotten,  instead 
of  being  wrought  into  the  substance  of  life.  We  need 
patient  week-by-week  labor,  directed  by  the  vision 
of  a  clearly  seen  goal,  to  mould  the  spirits  of  plastic 
youth  into  a  victorious  and  lasting  idealism.  The 
random  and  evanescent  influences  of  art  need  to  be 
utilized  and  supplemented  by  a  deliberate  process  of 
education. 

It  is  not  abstractly  necessary  that  the  educator 
should  be  the  Church,  or  that  the  idealism  with 
which  we  seek  to  stamp  the  souls  of  youth  should  be 
called  Christianity.  But  actually  our  public  schools 
are  almost  helpless  in  this  matter,  home  education 
is  too  haphazard  to  be  relied  on,  and  no  other  insti- 
tution has  the  resources  and  the  will  to  carry  on  the 
work.  Moreover,  while  this  passion  for  righteous- 
ness, this  devotion  of  heart  and  will  to  the  disinter- 
ested service  of  ideals,  under  any  name  would  be  as 
sweet,  a  concrete  name  of  some  sort,  a  common  rally- 
ing-cry,  is  as  necessary  to  it  as  a  nation's  name  and 
flag  is  to  the  passion  of  patriotism.  And  surely  there 
is  none  whose  name  our  spiritual  ideal  may  more  prop- 
erly bear  than  that  of  the  Galilean  prophet  through 
whose  teaching  and  death  there  has  come  to  the  mod- 
ern world  —  at  least,  the  world  of  the  West  —  far 
the  greater  part  of  the  spirituality  which  it  has  pos- 
sessed. 

Education,  then,  the  Christian  education  of  youth, 
to  a  degree  not  yet  attempted,  is  our  great  need,  if  the 
new  age  is  to  increase,  or  even  to  retain,  the  spiritual 
heritage  of  the  past.  The  era  of  evangelism  may  in- 
deed any  day  reappear ;  perhaps  we  can  never  afford  to 


114  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

do  without  the  aid  of  cataclysmic  conversions  and 
periodic  revivals.  But  we  have  learned  that  salva- 
tion comes  normally  through  education ;  that  must  be 
our  main  reliance.  Fortunately,  in  no  field  has  there 
been  more  progress  in  the  past  decade. 

Upon  two  points  educators  will  agree:  first,  that 
the  reason  why  education  has  accomplished  no  more 
than  it  has  in  the  past  is  that  we  are  as  yet  but  tyros 
in  the  art;  but  secondly,  that  education,  even  such 
as  we  have  given,  has  been  of  a  potency  which  we 
hardly  realize  in  moulding  the  minds  of  men.  If  we 
need  an  object  lesson,  see  what  the  German  ruling 
class  did  to  their  people  through  education.  When 
in  1871  von  Moltke  entered  Paris  at  the  head  of  the 
victorious  German  army,  he  said,  "  It  is  the  Prussian 
schoolmasters  who  must  be  given  the  credit  for  this." 
And  for  the  generation  succeeding  they  trained  their 
youth  to  militaristic  ideals,  to  unquestioning  loyalty 
to  the  State,  to  a  pride  and  confidence  in  the  destiny 
of  the  German  nation, —  with  the  result  that  we  know. 
The  potentialities  of  education  are  as  great  for  good 
as  for  harm;  in  the  use  of  this  powerful  instrument 
the  Church  should  not  lag  behind  the  Kaiser. 

We  are  continually  driven  back,  however,  to  the 
initial  difficulty,  that  of  winning  church  people  to 
a  clear  conception  of  what  education  in  religion  is. 
When  you  hear  it  said  of  such-and-such  a  church 
that  it  has  an  excellent  system  of  religious  education, 
ask.  What  is  it  then  that  the  youths  are  learning? 
Into  what  mould  are  their  spirits  being  shaped? 
Our  up-to-date  churches  have  discarded  the  absurd 
catechisms  of  an  older  generation,  and  no  longer  foist 
upon  their  communicants  the  propositions  of  that 
stiff  and  humorless  theology  that  was  the  spiritual 
milk  of  our  fathers.     But  the  so-called  religious  edu- 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      115 

cation  of  to-day  consists  chiefly  of  bits  of  the  history 
(or  pseudo-history)  and  literature  of  the  Jews.  Now 
the  Jews  of  Bible  times  —  or  rather  their  great 
prophets  and  poets  and  chroniclers  —  were  of  a  singu- 
larly religious  temper,  so  that  to  those  who  read 
deeply  in  the  Bible  and  with  understanding  there  are 
bound  to  come  visions  of  profound  and  precious  spirit- 
ual truths.  The  Bible  is  the  great  source-book  for 
the  study  of  the  Hebraic  spirit  —  as  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey  are  the  source-books  for  the  old  heroic  spirit 
of  Greece.  But  source-books  are  not  always  the  best 
tools  of  teaching;  and  the  question  is  pertinent 
whether  the  Old  Testament  legends  and  chronicles,  or 
even  the  Gospel  incidents  and  the  missionary  journeys 
of  Paul  are  the  directest  and  most  vital  means  of 
awakening  or  reinforcing  the  religious  life  of  youth. 

For  one  thing,  the  interest  of  the  pupil  in  a  Bible- 
class  is  primarily  attracted,  if  attracted  at  all,  to  the 
historical  episode;  and  w^hen  the  moral  is  drawn  it 
is  apt,  while  accepted  without  question,  to  aw^aken 
little  response.  In  the  second  place,  those  Jews 
were,  after  all,  a  provincial  and  undeveloped  people; 
and  their  situations  and  problems,  while  really,  of 
course,  eternal  in  many  of  their  aspects,  are  apt  to 
seem  remote  and  irrelevant  to  the  youth  of  to-day. 
Most  boys  and  girls  are  interested  in  contemporary 
problems,  in  live  issues,  in  the  question  how  they 
ought  to  act  under  such  and  such  circumstances. 
And  to  try  to  awaken  their  interest  in  the  religion 
of  to-dav  through  a  studv  of  the  Psalms  and  sermons 
and  anecdotes  of  the  Jews  of  two  thousand  years  ago 
is  a  curious  pedagogical  inversion.  Of  course  it  is 
clear  why  Bible  teaching  is  universally  accepted  as 
the  natural  and  almost  the  only  form  of  religious 
education ;  it  is  an  inheritance  from  the  days  when  the 


116  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

Bible  was  looked  to  as  the  unquestioned  authority  in 
morals.  But  to-day  the  burden  of  proof  should  be 
seen  to  rest  upon  those  who  insist  that  Christian  edu- 
cation must  be  carried  on  exclusively  or  even  pri- 
marily through  the  Bible. 

It  comes  down,  of  course,  to  a  question  of  what 
Christianity  is.  If  it  is,  as  we  have  said,  essentially 
a  Way  of  Life,  then  for  the  love  of  your  children, 
for  the  hope  of  the  future  of  the  world,  get  down 
to  business;  teach  the  children  that  Way  of  Life. 
Make  it  simple,  make  it  clear,  make  it  direct,  apply 
it  to  their  actual  problems  of  to-day  and  to-morrow. 
Let  every  boy  know  clearly  what  he  must  do  differ- 
ently if  he  enrolls  himself  a  Christian.  If  he  is  a 
normal  boy  and  is  approached  in  the  right  way  he 
will  love  to  enlist  in  the  Christian  army,  he  will  have 
a  real  sense  of  what  it  means  to  sing  "  Onward, 
Christian  soldiers,  marching  as  to  war  '^ —  to  war 
with  unkindness,  and  impurity,  and  laziness,  and 
sulking,  and  ill-temper,  and  the  other  enemies  which 
he  well  knows  and  to  which  he  can  be  made  heartily 
ashamed  to  yield. 

This  means  rescuing  the  boy's  religion  from  mere 
church  associations  and  making  it  an  integral  aspect 
of  his  daily  life.  Religion  for  many  men  and 
women,  as  well  as  for  children,  is  a  sort  of  intermit- 
tent dream,  something  that  wells  up  in  us  under  the 
peculiar  spell  of  organ  music  and  pulpit  elocution 
—  and  disappears  in  the  cold  light  of  Monday  morn- 
ing. Especially  to  the  healthy  boy  it  appeals  as 
rather  goody-goody  —  if  not  as  sheer  discomfort.  But 
let  the  boy  realize  that  life  itself  is  an  art,  and  an 
art  in  which  skill  is  learned  by  precious  few,  he  is 
at  once  naturally  ambitious  to  learn  it.  To  skate 
well,  to  swim,  to  play  baseball,  he  will  give  endless 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      117 

exertion ;  to  succeed  in  life  itself  will  more  and  more, 
as  he  grows  older,  awaken  liis  interest.  It  is,  first 
of  all,  a  question  of  showing  him  what  real  success 
is  —  the  sort  of  success  that  gives  life  lasting  joy  and 
power  and  the  love  of  his  comrades.  Then  he  must 
be  shown  that  it  is  not  enough  to  wish  to  be  good,  or 
brave,  or  kind;  he  must  learn  how  to  be  all  this. 
Never  quote  to  him  that  absurd  Victorian  counsel, 
"  Be  good,  dear  child,  and  let  who  will  be  clever." 
Show  him  that  it  takes  cleverness,  skill,  experience, 
insight  to  he  good.  Goodness  is  an  art  to  be  studied 
all  our  lives,  an  art  in  which  we  shall  at  best  none 
too  well  succeed  —  and  in  which  we  shall  very  likely 
not  even  try  to  succeed  unless  the  Church,  or  a  right- 
minded  parent,  or  some  other  source  of  inspiration, 
awakens  our  zeal  to  succeed. 

Happily,  the  Church  is  reawakening  to  the  real 
purpose  of  its  existence,  turning  back  from  the  dis- 
cussions of  orthodox  belief  to  the  practical  interests 
of  apostolic  times,  trying  to  help  people  to  solve 
their  daily  problems  of  conduct  and  to  serve  their 
neighbors.  The  last  aspect  of  our  church  life  to  feel 
this  wave  of  practicality  is  our  religious  education. 
Theological  students  still  spend  their  precious  years 
largely  in  studying  ancient  languages,  and  in  listen- 
ing to  the  ideas  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  scholars  about 
the  exact  date  of  composition  or  the  accurate  transla- 
tion and  exegesis  of  old  Jewish  laws  and  legends  and 
of  the  hasty  letters  which  an  early  Christian  mission- 
ary wrote  to  his  infant  churches,  instead  of  grappling 
by  day  and  by  night  to  understand  the  extremely  com- 
plex moral  problems  of  to-day  and  the  needs  and 
temptations  and  views  of  life  of  the  men  and  women 
whose  steps  they  are  to  presume  to  guide. 

The  Church  exists  to  show  men  what  is  their  real 


118  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

good,  to  point  out  to  them  how  to  avoid  making  a 
mess  of  their  Hves,  to  inculcate  in  them  the  spirit  of 
service,  and  to  teach  them  in  patient  detail  how 
wisely  to  serve.  This  is  not  a  mere  matter  of  en- 
lightenment, it  is  largely,  as  we  have  said,  a  matter 
of  training  the  will  —  a  thing  that  we  have  hardly 
begun  to  do.  How  is  a  boy,  when  he  meets  his  first 
great  unexpected,  half-understood  sex-temptation,  to 
resist?  There  is  a  problem  for  you!  Religion  is  a 
matter  of  just  such  big,  daily,  real  problems.  We 
speak  of  applied  Christianity, —  all  Christianity 
worth  the  name  is  applied  Christianity,  great  eternal 
spiritual  principles  applied  to  the  difficult  business 
of  living. 

Certainly  it  is  a  valuable  thing  that  our  boys  and 
girls  should  be  taught  an  accurate  historical  account 
of  the  origins  of  our  religion.  Unhappily,  the  account 
given  of  these  origins,  and  especially  of  the  life  and 
character  of  Jesus,  by  most  Christian  churches  is 
naively  t^nhistorical.  This  embroidery  of  miracles, 
this  acceptance  at  their  face  value  of  the  biased  and 
naive  chronicles  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  writers 
is  one  of  the  baneful  aspects  of  modern  Bible  teach- 
ing. But  a  real  comprehension  of  the  great  spiritual 
hero  whose  name  we  bear,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Church 
to  try  to  give;  and  in  some  measure  an  acquaintance 
with  the  prophets  that  went  before,  and  the  apostles 
that  followed  after. 

Furthermore,  religious  teachers  will  continue  to 
draw  from  the  Bible,  and  from  other  ancient  writ- 
ings, illustrations  and  parables  and  texts  for  the 
duties  they  present  to  their  pupils.  But  there  is  al- 
ways the  danger  in  this  of  a  literal  acceptance  of  the 
mythology  of  the  Bible.  How  far  religion  must  be 
mythological  to  be  moving,  how  far  the  religious  life 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      119 

needs  to  be  dramatized,  as  it  is  in  the  New  Testament 
picture  of  the  Judgment  Day,  or  in  the  anthropomor- 
phic God  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  order  to  grip  the 
hearts  of  men,  is  a  psychological  question,  the  dis- 
cussion of  which  would  take  us  afar.  There  are  many 
who  feel  that  Christianity,  to  live  at  all,  needs  the 
literal  acceptance  of  its  mythology,  and  that  openly  to 
rationalize  it  would  be  to  deal  it  its  death  blow. 

Is  not  this  too  pessimistic?  Is  it  really  true  that 
religion  needs  a  cloak  of  illusion  to  appeal  to  men's 
hearts?  Surely  not !  The  character  and  teachings  of 
Christ  and  of  the  prophets  make  their  appeal,  quite 
apart  from  the  glamour  of  miracle  and  myth,  to  the 
hearts  of  men  —  even  to  the  heart  of  childhood.  The 
problem  of  how  and  when  to  disentangle  the  truth 
from  the  poetry  in  the  myth  and  parable  in  the  Bible 
is  one  which  we  must  not  here  pause  to  discuss.  It 
is  merely  worth  while  to  allude  to  it  to  point  out  a 
danger  that  goes  with  Bible  education.  The  main 
point  is  rather  that  Bible  education  at  best  is  hut  a 
means  to  religions  education^  not  religious  education 
itself;  and  the  end  is  often  forgotten  in  attention  to 
the  means. 

There  are  many  other  dangerous  currents  in  the 
teaching  of  the  Church  that  affect  the  efficacy  of  our 
religious  education.  There  is  the  shallow  optimism 
that  says,  "  God's  in  his  heaven,  all's  right  with  the 
world,"  instead  of  saying,  "  God  is  in  our  hearts, 
to  make  all  right  with  the  world."  There  is  the 
comfortable  preaching  of  the  supernatural  coming  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God,  if  we  will  be  patient  and  wait 
for  it,  instead  of  the  divinely  imcomfortable  preach- 
ing of  the  need  of  our  getting  out  and  helping  the 
Kingdom  of  God  to  come.  There  is  the  spirit  of  brag- 
ging about  our  religion  as  the  perfect  religion  and 


120  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

the  patronizing  attitude  toward  tlie  so-called  heathen 
religions,  in  place  of  the  humble  eagerness  to  look  for 
inspiration  and  ideas  to  other  religions,  and  the  re- 
solve to  make  our  religion  the  best  in  the  world  by 
incorporating  whatever  is  helpful  and  uplifting  in 
them  all.  There  is  the  concern  with  merely  individual 
salvation,  which  ignores  the  truth  that  we  live  a  cor- 
porate life,  and  that  the  unrighteousness  of  our  social 
order  cannot  be  rectified  by  the  saving  of  the  souls  of 
some  of  its  members.  There  is  the  stupid  sectarian- 
ism that  insists  upon  the  importance  of  utterly  trivial 
beliefs,  which,  even  if  true,  have  little  to  do  with  the 
salvation  of  the  individual  or  of  society.  These  dis- 
tortions of  the  true  Christian  spirit,  and  many  others, 
we  might  discuss  again  here,  for  they  poison  and  in- 
hibit the  teaching  of  that  spirit  to  our  youth.  But  we 
must  return  to  emphasize  what  is  of  positive  im- 
portance. 

Christianity  is  the  Way  of  love  and  loyalty,  the  Way 
that  believes  in  lending  a  hand,  in  the  square  deal. 
Nineteen  hundred  years  ago  it  meant  stopping  by  the 
roadside  to  save  a  man  who  had  fallen  among  thieves. 
A  few  years  ago  it  meant  working  and  economizing  to 
send  aid  to  the  Belgians,  and  for  many  young  men  en- 
listing to  cross  the  seas  and  hring  aid  to  the  Belgians. 
The  word  "  love  "  sounds  sentimental ;  the  thing  the 
word  means  is  the  strongest  and  bravest  thing  in  the 
world  and  can  be  made  to  appeal  enormously  to  our 
boys  and  girls. 

Purity  is  a  harder  aspect  of  Christianity  for  youth 
to  learn  to  love.  But  again,  Christian  purity  is  not 
an  anaemic,  negative  thing;  it  is  a  great,  glorious 
passion  —  the  passion  symbolized  immortally  by  the 
cross.  Purity  is  a  simple  thing;  but,  like  many  an- 
other simple  thing,  like  keeping  your  temper,  like  lov- 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      121 

ing  unlovable  people,  it  is  hard.  It  is  the  hardest  of 
all  things  for  the  young,  or  for  many  of  them;  and 
because  it  is,  it  is  the  supreme  challenge  to  them,  to 
which,  if  you  can  touch  the  right  chord,  they  will 
respond  as  to  a  bugle  call. 

"God,"  "the  Kingdom  of  God,"— the  child  will 
not  clearly  understand  the  meaning  of  these  terms, 
but  they  can  mean  much  to  him.  And  they  can 
mean  more  and  more  to  us  as  we  grow  older,  until 
the  time  comes,  as  it  ought  to  come  to  us  all,  and 
would  to  most  of  us  if  we  had  ever  had  a  real  religious 
education,  when  they  are  the  supreme  words  in  our 
life  —  or  at  least  when  the  realities  which  they  stand 
for  are  the  supreme  realities  in  our  life;  when  to 
serve  God  with  body  and  mind  and  soul,  and  to  work 
for  the  bringing  in  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  is  our  one 
aim  in  life,  and  our  dearest  joy. 

Can  religious  education  do  this  for  common  men? 
There  is  hardly  a  doubt  that  it  can ;  for  it  has  done  just 
this  in  hapxjier  periods  of  the  world's  history.  The 
early  Christians  w^ent  about  pure  and  loyal,  with 
God  in  their  hearts,  and  hands  outstretched  to  help 
their  neighbors.  They  offered  religious  education  to 
all  they  met,  because  religion  w^as  so  infinitely  pre- 
cious to  them.  We  have  long  ceased  to  talk  much 
about  it  during  the  w^ek;  it  is  an  old  story,  and  we 
have  many  other  interests.  So  we  have  nearly  forgot- 
ten what  it  is.  We  think  it  is  necessary  to  invest  these 
simple  truths  with  all  sorts  of  wrappings  of  theology 
and  to  laboriously  extract  them  from  stories  of  long 
ago. 

Mr.  H.  G.  Wells,  in  his  Modern  Utopia^  elaborates  a 
conception  which  has  appealed  to  many  of  his  read- 
ers — that  of  the  Samurai,  a  sort  of  voluntary  nobil- 
ity, men  and  women  who  live  according  to  a  Rule  — 


122  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

not  a  harsli  Rule,  but  one  that  demands  effort  and 
unselfish  service.  Such  a  voluntary  nobility  is  the 
band  of  Christians  who  seek  to  keep  to  the  Rule  given 
them  by  Christ.  If  we  would  concentrate  our  efforts 
seriously  on  training  our  boys  and  girls  to  loyalty  to 
that  code,  using  all  the  lessons  that  applied  psychol- 
ogy and  child -study  are  teaching  us,  we  could  so 
stamp  it  into  their  natures  that,  though  they  might 
lapse  from  it,  the  great  majority  would  return  to  it 
and  know  themselves,  in  spite  of  the  lure  of  senses 
and  self,  to  be  inescapably  Christian  in  ultimate 
intent. 

This  process  has  three  aspects,  which,  though  more 
or  less  blended  in  practice,  need  separate  attention, 
that  none  be  unduly  neglected. 

First,  there  must  be  enlightenment.  The  preacher 
and  the  Sunday-school  teachers  must  see  to  it  that 
every  regular  attendant  receives  a  clear  and  compre- 
hensive notion  of  what  the  Christian  ideals  are,  why 
they  are  important,  and  how  they  should  be  applied 
to  the  concrete  personal  and  public  moral  problems 
of  our  daily  life.  Free  discussion  should  be  encour- 
aged of  the  questions  how  a  Christian  should  act 
under  such  or  such  circumstances.  The  blindness  of 
well-meaning  people  to  the  evil  consequences  of 
some  of  their  acts  should  be  patiently  but  insistently 
pointed  out,  and  examples  of  Christian  living  studied, 
that  insight  into  the  pitfalls  and  opportunities  of  life 
may  grow  more  penetrating  and  profound.  Books 
on  spiritual  living  and  on  practical  homely  ethical 
problems  should  be  available  in  the  church  library, 
and  the  minister  should  be  adviser  to  his  flock  in 
matters  of  difficult  decision  which  they  may  bring  to 
him. 


WHAT  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  MIGHT  BE      123 

Secondly^  there  must  be  commitment.  The  Chris- 
tian way  of  Hfe  must  be  definitely  accepted  by  each 
member  of  the  Church  as  Jiis  way.  A  profession  of 
intent  to  live  by  the  Christian  code  should  be  re- 
quired of  every  one  who  seeks  to  join  the  Church  — 
in  place  of  the  profession  of  belief  (in  matters  about 
which  the  member  can  seldom  have  a  well-founded 
judgment)  so  often  required  to-day.  This  pledge,  in 
abbreviated  form,  might  well  be  repeated  at  every 
church  and  Sunday-school  service,  as  the  Apostles' 
Creed  (so-called)  is  now  repeated  in  many  churches. 
The  members  must  never  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that 
what  unites  them  is  their  common  desire  and  their 
mutual  pledge  to  follow,  so  far  as  in  them  lies,  the 
path  blazed  by  the  Founder  of  their  Church  —  the 
Way  of  sacrifice  and  service.  The  consciousness  o^ 
their  final  commitment  to  this  Way  must  be  vivid 
enough  to  stay  with  them  during  the  cares  and  dis- 
tractions and  temptations  of  the  week. 

Thirdly,  there  must  be  reinforcement.  It  is  not 
enough  to  have  seen  what  is  right  to  do,  and  to  have 
willed  to  do  it.  Our  vision  clouds  and  our  wills 
falter.  Every  available  stimulus  must  be  utilized  to 
keep  the  flame  burning.  The  sermon  should  be  a 
challenge  to  wandering  thoughts,  a  call  to  wavering 
wills.  The  prayers  and  the  hymns,  the  lesson  read, 
the  lives  of  heroes  studied  in  the  Sunday  school, 
should  all  have  practical  value  in  rousing  emotion 
and  directing  it  into  channels  of  conduct. 

In  a  w^ord,  religious  education  consists  of  the  train- 
ing of  the  will  to  keep  to  a  code  —  that  code  which 
in  spite  of  our  sectarian  differences  we  agree  to  be  the 
way  Christ  taught  men  to  live.  If  Christianity  be 
essentially  the  devotion  of  heart  and  will  to  a  great 


124  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

ideal  of  life,  and  if  that  ideal  with  its  profound  re- 
flection of  the  deepest  needs  of  human  nature,  and  its 
instant  appeal  to  the  best  in  us,  be  drilled  into  us  in 
concrete  detail  from  childhood  up,  is  there  not  a  hope 
that  Christendom  may  really  be  Christianized? 


CHAPTER  ELEVEN 

SHALL   CHURCHES   HAVE   CREEDS? 

A  SHARP  test  of  our  belief  in  freedom  of  thought 
and  in  religious  education  is  offered  by  the  question, 
Shall  churches  have  creeds?  Whether  profession  of 
belief  in  the  creed  is  formally  required  of  applicants 
for  admission  to  the  Church,  or  whether  it  simply 
stands  as  the  implication  of  membership,  the  corol- 
lary of  the  pages  that  have  preceded  is  plainly  that 
a  church-creed  is  pernicious.  This  is  not  to  say  that 
exact  thinking,  and  the  formulation  of  beliefs,  is  un- 
desirable; on  the  contrary,  each  individual  should  be 
urged  to  think  upon  the  matters  with  which  the  his- 
toric creeds  are  concerned,  and  to  arrive  eventually, 
if  possible,  at  some  conclusion,  if  only  tentative  and 
provisional,  with  regard  to  them.  But  what  is  wrong 
is  that  any  such  conclusions  should  be  set  up  as  the 
creed  of  the  Church.  The  moment  that  happens, 
thought  is  petrified,  those  who  cannot  wholly  ac- 
quiesce are  made  uncomfortable,  if  not  unwelcome, 
and  others  who  might  else  seek  to  enter  the  Church 
turn  away. 

Most  Christian  churches  to-day  are  fairly  hospita- 
ble, and  accept  for  membership  anybody  of  respecta- 
ble character,  with  few  questions  asked.  Neverthe- 
less it  remains  true  that  in  joining,  a  man  is 
universally  supposed  to  give  tacit  assent  to  certain 
theological  and  historical  beliefs.  In  many  churches 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  so  called,  is  recited  weekly. 
Most  have  printed  statements  of  belief  which  are  pub- 

125 


126  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

lished  as  representing  the  convictions  of  the  members. 
A  frank  statement  of  doubt,  or  of  disbelief,  is  re- 
garded as  treason  and  as  warranting  the  charge  of 
hypocrisy  if  the  member  remains  within  the  Church. 
The  Church  stands  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  for  such 
doctrines ;  and  those  who  do  not  believe  them  stay  for 
the  most  part  outside,  however  much  they  acknowl- 
edge the  value  of  her  work,  and  however  wistfully 
they  may  realize  the  inspiration  her  fellowship  and 
counsel  might  give. 

Our  greatest  political  leader,  Abraham  Lincoln, 
was  one  of  these.  "  I  have  never  united  myself  to 
any  church,"  he  wrote,  '^  because  I  have  found  diffi- 
culty in  giving  my  consent  w^ithout  mental  reserva- 
tion to  the  .  .  .  statements  of  Christian  doctrine 
which  characterized  their  articles  of  belief  and  con- 
fession of  faith.'^  Our  greatest  moralist,  Emerson, 
resigned  his  office  as  Christian  minister  because  he 
felt  cramped  even  in  the  most  liberal  of  our  churches. 
Our  greatest  philosopher,  William  James,  likewise 
felt  constrained  to  remain  an  outsider.  So  Charles 
Eliot  Norton,  called  "  the  first  gentleman  of  Amer- 
ica." And  so  hosts  of  other  scarcely  less  distin- 
guished  men  and  women.  One  of  the  best-known  and 
loved  preachers  of  our  generation,  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott, 
telling  of  his  boyhood,  writes :  "  I  coveted  the  spirit 
of  life  w^hich  I  recognized  in  my  grandfather,  my  fa- 
ther, my  mother,  and  my  aunt,  who  after  my  mother's 
death  was  a  second  mother  to  me.  To  get  that  life  I 
thought  I  must  understand  and  accept  the  creed  of  the 
church  to  w^hich  they  all  belonged,  and  for  four  or 
five  years  I  studied,  as  I  had  opportunity,  earnestly 
and  with  boyish  thoroughness,  that  creed.  I  thought 
to  find  in  it  a  gateway  to  Christ.  Instead  I  found  it 
a  barbed-wire  entan":lement." 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  127 

When  we  turn  to  the  masses  of  common  folk,  we 
find  millions  who  are  to-day  staying  without  the 
Church  because  they  do  not  feel  welcome  and  at  home 
within  her  portals.  Religious  at  heart  many  of  them 
are,  essentially  Christian  in  spirit,  hating  sin  and 
selfishness,  personal  impurity  and  social  injustice, 
but  repelled  from  the  Church  by  her,  sometimes  un- 
obtrusive but  always  real,  barrier  of  theoretic  dog- 
matism. For  example,  a  recent  writer  in  the  Nation 
speaks  of  "  the  chain-gang  conformity  of  church-mem- 
bership. Religion  to  most  of  my  acquaintances  re- 
mains the  synonym  for  a  house  of  bondage.  Once 
they  outgrew  the  subordinations  of  youth  they  spon- 
taneously, joyfully,  cast  religion  aside.''  Is  the 
maintenance  of  this  dogmatic  barrier  worth  the  cost? 

If  not,  what  shall  be  required  for  admission  to  the 
Church?  Surely  there  must  be  some  bond  of  union, 
something  for  which  its  members  openly  stand.  The 
contention  of  this  volume  is  that  the  bond  of  union 
should  be  a  covenant,  a  pledge  to  live  in  the  Christian 
Way.  Conduct,  not  creed,  should  be  the  test;  not 
what  a  man  believes,  but  what  he  does,  not  what  he 
says  or  thinks,  but  what  he  is.  Each  individual  may 
formulate  his  own  creed,  brief  or  elaborate.  But  the 
churches,  as  such,  should  frankly  cease  to  be  believ- 
ers in  certain  creeds,  not  simply  winking  at  the 
heresies  of  their  more  liberal  members,  but  making 
it  plain  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  heresy  for 
them,  that  a  member  is  free  to  believe  or  disbelieve 
according  as  his  own  reason  and  experience  lead  him. 
The  Church,  that  is,  should  put  as  her  one  require- 
ment the  wish  and  earnest  endeavor  to  live  the  Chris- 
tian life.  Are  you  willing,  she  should  ask,  to  enroll 
yourself  publicly  as  a  follower  of  Christ,  to  live  the 
sort  of  life  he  taught,  at  whatever  needful  personal 


128  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

sacrifice?  If  so,  you  have  a  perfect  right  to  the  name 
Christian  and  to  the  fellowship  of  the  Church,  what- 
ever jour  doctrinal  views  may  be. 

The  goal  —  complete  intellectual  freedom,  but  con- 
certed action  —  is  not  to  be  reached  merely  b}^  prun- 
ing and  expurgating,  revising  and  minimizing  the 
creeds.  A  brief  creed,  a  vague  creed,  a  creed  ex- 
pressed in  modern  terms,  will  still  exclude  many  who 
belong  within  the  Church.  Our  Puritan  forbears, 
who  came  to  these  shores  for  "  freedom  to  worship 
God,"  meant  simply  freedom  to  worship  in  their  way, 
not  freedom  for  every  one  else  to  worship  in  his  way. 
Ar>d  Eoger  Williams,  for  example,  was  as  much  a  re- 
ligious outcast  in  New  England  as  he  would  have 
been  in  old  England.  So  most  of  our  contemporary 
"  liberal  "  churches  stand  not  so  much  for  real  free- 
dom of  thought  as  for  a  new  set  of  view^s,  simpler, 
perhaps,  and  less  obviously  irrational,  but  none  the 
less  impossible  of  acceptance  for  many.  The  liberal 
movement  will  not  reach  its  logical  consummation 
until  the  churches  grow  to  be  generous  enough 
to  admit  without  disapproval  all  varieties  of  opinion 
that  are  compatible  with  the  Christian  Way  of  life. 

Why  is  this  obvious  ideal  so  slow  of  general  accept- 
ance? The  reason  lies  partly  in  sheer  inertia  and  the 
momentum  of  tradition,  and  partly  in  the  passionate 
loyalty  of  church-members  to  what  they  believe  to  be 
true  and  know  to  be  precious  to  them.  Whatever 
their  pet  beliefs  may  be,  they  feel  them  to  be  an  es- 
sential part  of  the  faith,  and  look  upon  a  Christianity 
that  does  not  insist  upon  them  as  an  enfeebled  and 
degenerate  religion.  They  w^ould  not  tamper  with 
the  heritage  that  has  been  handed  down  to  them  and 
leave  an  emasculated  Christianity  for  the  future.  To 
be  ti'ue  to  the  faith  committed  unto  them  is  their  duty 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  129 

and  their  deep  desire.  They  fear  that  a  creedless 
Christianity  would  degenerate  into  a  mere  society 
for  ethical  culture  or  social  service  —  excellent  ends, 
but  not  inclusive  of  all  that  they  mean  by  Christian- 
ity. There  are  specifically  Christian  experiences, 
there  is  a  specifically  Christian  life,  for  the  exposi- 
tion and  explanation  of  which  the  dogmas  exist,  and 
the  realization  of  which  by  each  generation  is  too  vital 
a  matter  for  us  to  relegate  those  dogmas  to  the  back- 
ground. 

This  position  assumes  the  truth  of  the  dogmas. 
And  the  first  question  to  ask  of  these  conservatives  is. 
Can  we  really  knoiv  them  to  be  true?  Christian  be- 
liefs have  undergone  so  many  changes,  and  are  to-day 
so  various,  that  a  humbler  attitude  would  seem  more 
appropriate.  Even  if  they  are  wholly  and  literally 
true,  there  are  many  Christians  to  whom  they  will 
continue  to  seem  untrue  or  doubtful.  Ought  the 
majority  to  insist  that  the  minority  profess  their  be- 
liefs or  stay  without  the  churches? 

But  an  even  more  telling  counter  to  the  conservative 
position  consists  in  pointing  out  that  a  profes- 
sion of  belief  in  these  dogmas  does  not  in  the  least 
ensure  a  realization  of  the  spiritual  truths  which 
they  enshrine.  Nor  does  the  deletion  of  the  re- 
quirement of  such  profession  debar  any  one  from 
a  full  acceptance  of  the  beliefs.  It  will  still  be  per- 
fectly proper  for  those  who  cherish  any  particular 
belief  to  convert  whomsoever  they  can  to  it.  No  one 
who  does  believe  will  be  asked  to  stop  believing;  no 
one  who  does  not  believe  is  to  be  discouraged  from 
believing.  The  latter  is  to  be  invited  within  the 
Church ;  here  he  can  be  got  at,  and  perhaps  converted 
to  the  beliefs  in  question,  far  more  readily  than  when 
he  remained  without.     If  the  beliefs  will  stand  the 


130  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

test  of  open  discussion,  thev  can  be  far  more  effec- 
tively preached  to  the  Church's  own  members  than 
to  those  who  stand  without.  Were  the  Church  to 
make  it  plain  that  all  belong  to  her  who  love,  believe 
in,  and  are  trying  to  live  by  the  Christian  Way  of  life, 
no  matter  how  they  describe  and  formulate  it,  or  how 
imperfectly  they  understand  it,  these  men  and  women 
would  far  oftener  come  to  her  for  inspiration  and  com- 
fort. In  time,  in  the  atmosphere  of  Christian  tradi- 
tions, they  might  ripen  into  a  fuller  religious  experi- 
ence. So  it  seems  that  the  very  end  for  which  the 
conservatives  are  aiming  would  Jbe  better  attained  by 
reversing  their  methods. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  situation  seems  to  be  this, 
that  these  doctrines,  once  so  throbbing  with  meaning, 
are  now  mere  husks  to  the  average  Christian,  retain- 
ing a  vague  halo  of  holiness,  arousing  a  humble  sense 
of  reverence  and  allegiance,  but  almost  meaningless 
in  terms  of  life.  It  may  even  be  questioned  whether 
the  creeds  are  not  often  veils  between  us  and  the  in- 
sights they  once  crystallized;  their  antique  language 
gives  a  semblance  of  unreality  and  remoteness  to 
truths  which,  if  they  were  to  enter  into  our  own  expe- 
rience, would  be  personally  significant,  burningly  real, 
cataclysmic.  To  bow  before  a  creed,  which  represents 
others'  experience  and  insight,  may  be  to  choke  off  the 
development  of  one's  own  religious  experience,  to 
make  religion  a  second-hand  affair  rather  than  a  per- 
sonal aspiration,  struggle,  and  victory.  Were  it  not 
better  done  to  leave  to  the  preacher  the  function  of 
making  real  to  his  flock  the  insights  that  lie  behind 
the  creeds  and  of  leading  them  on  to  the  reenactment 
in  their  lives  of  the  experiences  that  gave  them  birth? 
Should  we  not  be  actually  fostering  a  deeper  religious 
life  if,  instead  of  thrusting  a  stereotyped  and  half- 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  131 

comprehended  creed  upon  everyone,  we  were  to  let 
creeds  become  again  —  as  they  were  in  the  greatest 
days  of  the  Church  —  elastic,  fluid,  responsive  to  the 
insight  of  the  individual  soul?  Would  it  not  be  bet- 
ter to  run  the  risk  of  inaccuracy  and  crudity  of  ex- 
pression in  a  man's  professions  for  the  sake  of  having 
those  professions  represent  his  own  growing  expe- 
rience? 

But  supposing  the  conservatives  to  be  right  in  say- 
ing that  full  freedom  of  belief  within  the  Church 
would  make  for  a  certain  loss.  Suppose  that  the 
creed  of  a  given  church  is  absolutely  true  and  ulti- 
mate, and  that  the  relegating  of  it  to  the  background 
would  weaken  belief  therein ;  supposing,  further,  that 
the  attainment  of  a  full  Christian  experience  is  de- 
pendent upon  the  grasp  of  these  truths  —  would  even 
this  justify  us  in  insisting  upon  them?  It  is  a  pity 
that  every  man  should  not  have  the  full-rounded 
Christian  experience;  but  this  is  no  time  to  stickle 
for  spiritual  completeness,  when  the  very  rudiments 
of  the  Christian  life  are  thereby  hid  from  many. 
While  we  haggle  over  salvation  by  faith,  or  the  atone- 
ment, or  perchance  the  proper  way  to  baptize  or  gov- 
ern the  Church,  the  forces  that  make  for  sensuality 
and  worldliness  are  busily  at  work.  After  all,  how- 
ever precious  they  are,  the  dogmas  are  of  secondary 
importance ;  if  they  are  stumbling-blocks  in  our  broth- 
ers' way,  keeping  them  from  that  conversance  with 
Christianity  which  even  without  the  dogmas  could 
mean  so  much  for  their  stimulus  and  consolation, 
they  should  be  ruthlessly  set  aside.  Efficiency  al- 
ways implies  sacrifice ;  and  we  must  offer  our  spiritual 
teaching  in  terms  that  all  can  accept,  even  if  it  is  less 
than  we  would  wish  to  give. 

There  is,  however,  another  argument  of  the  con- 


\ 


132  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

servatives  which  needs  comment,  the  argument  that 
conduct  is  the  fruit  of  belief  —  meaning  that  the 
proper  way  to  produce  a  noble  life  is  to  teach  correct 
opinions.  In  this  idea  there  is  some  truth;  certain 
beliefs  naturally  stimulate  certain  types  of  conduct, 
and  a  man's  opinions  are  by  no  means  unimportant. 
But  the  least  observation  would  show  that  a  noble 
character  is  by  no  manner  of  means  the  exclusive  pos- 
session of  the  orthodox.  Right  living  is  far  oftener 
and  more  easily  attained  through  the  contagion  of 
example,  or  through  the  direct  perception  of  its 
worth,  than  indirectly,  as  a  corollary  of  one's  world- 
view.  Indeed,  the  desirability  of  the  Christian  life 
is  much  more  obvious  and  generally  admitted  than 
the  truth  of  Christian  dogma.  A  man  does  not  need 
a  creed  to  supply  him  with  motives  for  living  in  what 
is  so  evidently  the  best  way.  Does  the  youth  need 
to  understand  the  theory  of  morals  to  be  led  to  love 
honor,  chivalry,  generosity?  It  is  doubtful  whether 
the  study  of  theoretical  ethics  has  ever  had  any  ap- 
preciable bearing  upon  a  man's  allegiance  to  an  ethi- 
cal code.  In  nearly  all  matters,  truths  of  practice 
are  far  surer  and  more  convincing  than  truths  of 
theory.  And  just  as  we  do  not  need  to  teach  the 
psychology  of  morality  to  the  lad  whom  we  wish  to 
guide  into  the  path  of  honor  and  integrity,  just  as  we 
do  not  need  to  start  a  practical  electrician  upon  the 
study  of  that  utterly  dubious  realm,  the  theory  of 
electricity,  so  we  do  not  need  to  induct  our  tyro  in 
Christianity  into  the  mysteries  of  theology.  Such  a 
procedure  inverts  the  natural  sequence  of  interest  and 
intelligibility.  Certainly  there  is  a  reason  why,  be- 
hind every  practical  precept  of  morals  and  religion; 
the  comprehension  of  these  reasons  is  a  legitimate 
aim  for  mature  minds.     But  quite  without  such  in- 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  133 

sight,  and  usually  prior  to  it,  the  practical  ideals 
make  their  own  appeal  and  prove  themselves  right  in 
daily  experience.  The  Christian  Way  is  both  logi- 
cally and  psychologically  independent  of  all  theology, 
and  may  be  practised  with  passionate  consecration 
by  one  who  has  no  clear  conviction  with  regard  to 
any  such  matters,  and  even  no  interest  therein. 

Nor  does  experience  corroborate  the  fear  that  fervor 
will  fade  when  the  full-blooded  beliefs  of  the  "  or- 
thodox "  are  relegated  to  the  background.  Such  a 
fear  has  been  expressed  with  regard  to  every  one  of 
the  beliefs  once  common  but  now  obsolescent.  The 
fear  of  eternal  torment  for  misconduct  would  seem  to 
be  the  belief  beyond  all  others  of  which  the  loss  would 
lead  to  laxity.  But  though  few  Christians  to-day 
seriously  believe  in  Hell,  in  any  literal  sense,  the 
general  practice  of  virtue  is  at  least  as  high  as  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  when  no  one  doubted  its  grim  real- 
ity. There  is  motive  enough  for  the  normal  man  to 
be  virtuous  without  the  spur  of  any  supernatural 
fears  or  hopes.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  the  push  of 
passion  and  the  lure  of  pleasure  do  their  work  with 
orthodox  and  liberal  alike,  without  relation  to  their 
differing  world-conceptions,  but  only  with  relation  to 
their  differing  temperaments  and  temptations,  and 
the  moralizing  influences  which  have  impinged  upon 
each. 

Finally,  the  conservatives  are  apt  to  say.  This  is 
the  belief  of  this  church ;  if  you  do  not  like  it,  go 
elsewhere ;  you  have  no  right  to  be  in  a  church  whose 
tenets  you  do  not  hold.  The  answer  to  this  is  that  in 
many  places  there  is  no  other  church-home  within 
reach,  or  none  at  which  a  similar  barrier  is  not  im- 
posed. To  keep  founding  new  churches  as  beliefs 
change  is  to  divide  energy,  to  waste  resources,  to 


134  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

weaken  the  common  Christian  endeavor.  The  Church 
should  be  thought  of  as  a  great  international  insti- 
tution, like  the  schools  and  the  police,  belonging  to 
us  all,  and  not  the  exclusive  property  of  those  who 
cling  to  the  viewpoint  of  an  older  day.  It  is  ours  as 
well  as  theirs;  we  have  as  good  a  right  in  it  as  they. 
Few  of  the  great  reformers  have  deemed  it  necessary 
to  leave  the  church  of  their  youth,  but  have  sought 
instead  to  leaven  it  with  their  new  inspiration  or  new 
outlook.  Such  a  melting-pot  of  varying  convictions 
is  a  far  healthier  institution  than  one  which  refuses 
any  light  but  the  old  light.  And  those  of  us  who  hope 
to  see  the  Christian  church  again  in  the  van  of  hu- 
man thought  are  by  no  means  willing  to  abandon  it 
to  those  who  would  tie  down  this  branch  of  it  or  that 
to  a  parochial  and  limited  vision. 

If  the  main  arguments  for  the  retention  of  church- 
creeds  are  thus  answerable,  let  us  see  what  positive 
advantages  may  be  expected  to  follow  their  abolition. 

The  most  striking  advantage  is  that  it  will  restore 
the  right  emphasis  to  Christianity.  The  Church  has 
been  so  much  afraid  of  "  heresy,"  so  little  afraid  of 
sin,  that  the  world  has  largely  mistaken  its  mission 
—  if  it  has  not  mistaken  it  itself.  It  is  indeed  to  our 
common  shame  —  for  these  matters  could  be  quickly 
mended  if  the  general  conscience  of  Christians  were 
quickened  —  that  men  who  have,  for  example,  amassed 
fortunes  by  ruining  competitors  or  paying  starvation 
wages  to  employees  should  remain  unrebuked  in  our 
midst,  while  other  men,  who  would  scorn  to  make 
money  at  such  a  cost,  men  of  honor  and  principle, 
men  of  the  true  Christian  spirit,  should  be  practically 
kept  out  of  the  Church  by  their  beliefs  or  lack  of  be- 
lief about  matters  of  fact.  Freedom  from  mammon- 
worship,  and  the  spirit  of  brotherhood  in  business, 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  135 

are  by  no  means  all  of  Christianity;  but  they  are  a 
far  more  essential  aspect  of  it  than  assent  to  any  doc- 
trines. If  we  should  substitute  a  covenant  for  a 
creed,  a  yow  of  allegiance  to  unselfish  and  pure  liv- 
ing, of  personal  loyalty  to  Christ  and  his  ideals  of 
conduct,  we  should  not  only  be  doing  something  far 
more  important  than  the  winning  of  assent  to  any 
cosmological  or  historical  beliefs,  but  we  should  be 
directly  appealing  to  the  very  widespread  hunger  for 
goodness  and  indignation  at  evil  and  greatly  increas- 
ing the  prestige  and  importance  of  the  Church  in  the 
eyes  of  the  world. 

Scarcely  less  important  a  result  would  follow  in 
that  we  should  cease  alienating  the  intellectually 
scrupulous.  Dogmatism  has  been  the  great  vice  of 
the  Church,  embittering  against  her  men  of  the  true 
scientific,  the  open-minded,  non-partisan  spirit,  and 
arousing  a  perpetual  distrust  of  her  among  those 
who  feel  that  free  thought  is  essential  to  progress. 
The  utterances  of  the  preacher  will  always  be  dis- 
counted by  the  world  so  long  as  he  is  known  to  be 
committed  to  certain  conclusions,  and  a  theology  will 
always  be  received  with  suspicion  which  is  artificially 
protected  from  criticism  and  alteration.  It  is  bad 
enough  in  itself  that  we  accept  from  immature  con- 
verts a  profession  of  belief  in  matters  about  which 
they  cannot  possibly  judge  —  a  belief  which  must  be 
largely  based  on  a  lack  of  any  ideas  to  the  contrary. 
But  when  we  find  that  we  are  repelling  thousands  of 
the  more  alert,  who  are  not  so  ready  to  commit  them- 
selves to  an  assertion  of  belief  in  matters  beyond  their 
ken,  it  becomes  a  matter,  not  only  of  fine  scrupulous- 
ness, but  of  serious  practical  importance. 

An  incidental  gain  of  no  small  moment  would  be 
that  alluded  to  in  an  earlier  chapter,  the  attraction 


136  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

to  the  ministry  of  a  more  alert  and  intellectually 
gifted  set  of  men.  The  man  of  fineness  and  intel- 
lectual conscience  dislikes  intensely  to  put  himself 
in  a  position  where  he  will  be  practically  bribed  to 
profess  just  such  and  such  beliefs  and  no  others. 
Many  ministers  to-day  are  uncomfortable  in  the  secret 
knowledge  of  their  own  heresy,  many  would  be  made 
uncomfortable  were  they  to  acknowledge  their  real 
convictions.  That  such  a  situation  should  be  forced 
upon  the  spiritual  leaders  of  the  nation  is  as  intolera- 
ble as  it  is  unnecessary.  Were  these  men  free  to 
speak  out,  they  would  not  tear  down  the  Christian 
structure ;  on  the  contrary,  they  would  the  better  but- 
tress it,  for  the  weakness  of  the  Church  has  been  her 
clinging  to  indefensible  positions.  And  they  would 
breathe  deeper,  preach  with  a  truer  note,  speak  out  of 
their  hearts  rather  than  in  time-honored  phrases. 

Still  another  advantage  lies  in  the  possibility  which 
only  this  attitude  will  open  up  of  union  among  Chris- 
tians. It  is  chimerical  to  hope  that  any  one  church 
can  convince  the  others  and  win  their  acceptance  of 
its  distinctive  doctrines.  Union  must  come  in  an- 
other way.  Differ  as  we  do,  and  shall  for  any  visible 
future,  in  creed,  we  agree  in  seeking  to  repeat  the 
same  universal  Christian  experience,  we  agree  to 
common  duties  and  common  ideals,  we  agree  in  a  com- 
mon loyalty  to  Christ  and  a  common  zeal  to  work 
under  his  leadership  for  the  bringing  in  of  the  King- 
dom. We  know  that  the  coming  of  that  Kingdom 
would  be  greatly  hastened,  and  our  personal  Chris- 
tian life  vastly  quickened,  by  a  closer  cooperation 
and  the  enthusiasm  that  a  sense  of  union  would 
bring.  And  yet  we  block  the  way  to  this  consumma- 
tion by  internecine  disagreements  upon  what  is  sec- 
ondary.    There  is  no  essential  reason  why  a  great 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  137 

body  of  men  each  of  whom  is  free  to  formulate  his 
own  creed  should  not  form  one  church,  fired  with  a 
common  hatred  of  sin,  a  common  belief  in  and  dedica- 
tion to  Christian  living.  Such  a  church  could,  and 
would,  regenerate  the  world.  And  the  true  creed, 
whichever  that  may  be,  would  win  general  acceptance 
much  more  rapidly  than  it  ever  will  while  each 
church  has  its  particular  creed  which  it  feels  a  duty 
to  support. 

But  the  imperious  reason  for  the  letting-down  of 
the  creed  barrier  is  that  the  men  without  need  the 
Church  and  the  Church  has  need  of  them.  There  are 
souls  to  be  saved,  there  are  millions  who  are  spirit- 
ually starved.  What  right  have  we  to  offer  them 
spiritual  food  only  in  terms  which  many  of  them  can- 
not accept?  Many  such  eager  souls,  finding  one  sort 
of  barrier  at  the  Methodist  door,  another  at  the  Pres- 
byterian door,  and  so  down  the  line,  end  by  putting 
their  idealism  and  courage  and  energy  into  socialism 
or  anarchism  (witness,  for  example,  the  passionate 
idealism  and  soul-hunger  in  Giovannitti's  poem  "  The 
Cage,''  in  the  June,  1914,  Atlantic)^  or  some  other  of 
the  non-Christian  movements  which  are  pushing  in  so 
many  different  directions  and  scattering  that  human 
power  which  ought  to  be  brought  into  one  concerted 
movement  for  the  uplift  of  humanity. 

Very  many,  moreover,  of  those  within  the  Church 
are  half-hearted  in  their  allegiance  because  of  their 
uncertain  or  partial  allegiance  to  the  official  creed. 
How  largely  the  subordination  of  creeds  would 
strengthen  their  allegiance  and  how  far  it  would  add 
to  the  membership  of  the  churches,  it  is  impossible 
to  predict.  Certainly  many  would,  as  now,  stand 
without,  or  be  but  nominal  Christians,  simply  be- 
cause they  are  not  ready  to  take  up  their  cross  and 


138  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

foHow  Christ.  The  lure  of  the  world  and  its  illicit 
pleasures  —  the  transitory  sweetness  of  sense-in- 
dulgence, the  pride  of  unscrupulous  personal  success 
—  are  a  steady  counter-agent  to  the  Christian  preach- 
ing of  purity  and  service. 

But  that  is  no  excuse  for  keeping  out  or  alienating 
the  loyalty  of  those  for  whom  the  barrier  is  intel- 
lectual. As  Mr.  Meredith  Nicholson  says,  we  "  should 
not  debate  metaphysics  through  a  barred  wicket  with 
men  who  need  the  spiritual  or  physical  help  of  the 
Church."  The  Church  ought  to  be  the  great  brother- 
hood of  those  who  are  battling  against  evil,  the  uni- 
versal director  and  organizer  of  the  world's  good- 
will. In  this  long  and  not  always  winning  battle  it 
is  a  grave  fault  to  let  minor  considerations  weaken 
and  divide  the  forces  of  good,  the  army  of  God.  The 
times  call  for  a  large  tolerance  in  unessentials. 

"  It  is  a  very  impracticable  question,"  writes  Mr. 
C.  F.  Dole,  "  to  ask  whether  a  man  believes  that  Jesus 
was  God.  The  worst  men  may  believe  this  and 
tremble.  They  are  no  better  for  believing  it.  It  is 
a  vital  question  to  ask  any  man :  Do  you  believe  in 
what  the  Good  Samaritan  did?  And  will  you  go  and 
do  likewise?  " 

Christianity  once  had  and  lost  the  opportunity  of 
breaking  down  all  barriers  between  men  and  ushering 
in  a  real  human  brotherhood.  She  broke  down  in- 
deed the  old  barriers,  but  she  erected  new  ones.  It 
is  not  too  late,  however,  for  her  to  realize  her  op- 
portunity. In  so  doing  she  will  be  returning  to  the 
spirit  of  Christ  and  the  noblest  of  the  prophets. 
Christ  never  demanded  orthodoxy  of  belief;  his  in- 
vitation was  "  Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor  and 
are  heavy  laden."  The  question  he  asked  was: 
*^  Can  ye  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink  of?  " —  the  cup 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  139 

of  self-renunciation.  The  test  he  pictured  at  the 
Judgment  Day  was  that  of  practical  service.  His 
daily  concern  was  not  with  right  opinion  but  with 
right  living  and  the  coming  of  his  Father's  kingdom 
—  the  reign  of  righteousness  and  peace  on  earth. 
"  By  this  shall  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if 
ye  have  love  one  to  another.'' 

For  some  three  hundred  years  Christianity  set  up 
no  hard  and  fast  requirement  of  "  orthodoxy."  The 
creed-barriers  are  largely  the  result  of  the  spirit  of 
St.  Augustine.  The  spirit  of  the  Reformation  was, 
in  part,  a  revolt  against  this  creedal-yoke,  and  an  in- 
sistence upon  the  right  of  individual  judgment.  But 
the  Reformation  was  not  fully  conscious  of  its  own 
ideal ;  and  it  remains  for  the  twentieth,  or  some  later, 
century,  to  carry  it  to  its  logical  consummation. 

Matters  are  mending,  on  the  whole,  rather  rapidly. 
Heresy  trials  are  becoming  rarer,  churches  and  the- 
ological schools  are  treating  their  creeds  as  venerable 
monuments  of  ancient  faith,  no  longer  binding.  The 
time  is  surely  coming  when  no  creed-tests  will  be  im- 
posed on  applicants  for  the  ministry.  They  will  be 
accepted  and  ordained  not  because  of  their  theology 
but  because  of  the  earnestness  of  their  spiritual  life, 
the  profundity  of  their  moral  insight,  their  power  to 
kindle  in  other  men  the  sacred  flame.  They  must  in- 
deed be  acquainted  with  the  rational  basis  of  religion 
and  able  to  explain  to  the  struggling  and  inquiring 
the  truth  about  the  Bible  and  the  creeds;  but  above 
all  they  must  know  men  and  how  to  help  them,  they 
must  be  full  of  the  love  of  men  and  the  ability  to  lead 
them.  What  is  wrong,  fatally  wrong,  is  that  they 
should  be  bribed  by  the  necessity  of  getting  and  keep- 
ing their  positions  to  profess  belief  in  anything  what- 
soever but  the  importance  of  living  the  religious  life. 


140  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

If  they  are  suited  by  their  moral  qualities  and  their 
mental  talents  for  spiritual  instruction  and  leader- 
ship they  must  not  be  disqualified  by  their  honesty  or 
their  unwillingness  to  tamper  with  such  opinions  as 
naturally  form  in  their  minds  as  they  read  and  study 
and  observe. 

The  following  communication  from  a  professor  in 
one  of  our  leading  Episcopal  theological  schools,  pub- 
lished in  the  New  York  Times ,  Oct.  28,  1906,  is  signifi- 
cant of  the  new  current :  "  So  far  from  being  a  league 
to  maintain  a  theory,  the  Church  is  a  permanent 
branch  of  society,  changing  like  the  State,  but  like  the 
State  ultimately  indispensable.  .  .  .  The  Church  and 
the  Pulpit  exist,  among  other  ends,  for  stimulus  and 
leadership.  We  have  never  yet  seen  what  the  pulpit 
might  become.  From  it  the  strongest  thinkers  about 
life  might  speak,  and  light  and  heat  radiate  together. 
Its  leadership  might  be  genuine,  and  sound  a  sum- 
mons for  the  best  young  minds  that  had  not  been 
heard  before.  Shall,  then,  the  public  critics  encour- 
age the  Christian  bodies  to  narrow  the  aperture  that 
admits  to  the  ministry,  so  that  before  long  no  large 
mind  can  enter  it,  to  steer  away  (if  I  may  put  it 
otherwise)  from  the  midstream  of  national  life  to  a 
stagnant  back-water  of  their  own?  Or  shall  it  en- 
courage them  to  think  that  it  is  spiritual  life  and 
spiritual  leading  that  matter,  and  that  the  broad  facts 
that  make  these  possible  are  the  gist  of  the  creeds? 
Which  of  these  courses  is  the  wiser,  the  more  states- 
manlike and  more  humane?'^ 

Why  should  w^e  not  return  to  the  valuations  of 
Jesus?  Why  not  make  the  Church  the  home  of  all 
those  who  hate  evil  and  would  learn  to  do  well  ?  Why 
not  preach  Christianity  as  it  was  originally  preached, 
not  as  an  aggregate  of  (to  many)  difficult  beliefs,  but 


SHALL  CHURCHES  HAVE  CREEDS?  141 

as  an  ideal  of  difficult  practice;  convinced  that  he 
who  does  the  will  of  the  Father  shall  know  enough  of 
the  doctrine,  and  that,  in  any  case,  the  doing  of  the 
will  is  more  important?  Why  complicate  what  will 
always  be  a  difficulty  for  the  will  with  an  unneces- 
sary, and  irrelevant,  difficulty  for  the  intellect?  Why 
not  sincerely  repeat  the  prophets'  invitation,  which 
Christ  made  his :  "  What  doth  the  Lord  require  of 
thee  but  to  do  justice,  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk 
humbly  with  thy  God?''  Why  not  frame  the 
Church's  invitation  in  those  glorious  words  which  are 
the  last  words  of  the  Bible  to  us :  "  The  Spirit  and 
the  Bride  (that  is,  the  Church)  say  Come!  And  let 
him  that  is  athirst  come  I  Whosoever  will,  let  him 
come  and  drink  of  the  water  of  life  freely  I  " 


CHAPTER  TWELVE 

SHALL   WE    UNITE   THE   CHURCHES? 

It  is  the  shame  of  Christians  that  instead  of  unit- 
ing in  the  endeavor  after  the  spiritual  life,  they  have 
divided  on  all  sorts  of  speculative  and  trivial  differ- 
ences. Instead  of  teaching  that  righteousness  and 
purity  and  love  are  all-important,  and  theoretical 
opinions  or  methods  of  organization  of  quite  subsid- 
iary account,  they  have  formed  a  new  sect  for  every 
petty  divergence  of  belief  and  church-government. 
Instead  of  becoming  a  strong  inclusive  body  of  all 
those  who  hate  sensuality  and  selfishness  and  sin,  they 
have  cast  out  of  their  fellowship  those  who  would  not 
bow  before  the  historical  and  cosmological  ideas  of 
the  dominant  majority,  have  let  ecclesiastical  ambi- 
tions and  rivalries  split  their  forces,  and  so  are  now 
not  One  Church  but  a  jostling  crowd  of  hundreds  of 
separate  sects. 

There  is,  to  be  sure,  color  and  interest  in  the  variety 
of  churches;  denominationalism  has  not  been  an  un- 
mitigated evil.  It  has  stimulated  discussion  on  re- 
ligious matters,  and  a  realization  that  the  truth  in 
regard  to  them  is  in  dispute.  This  intellectual  fer- 
ment is  better  than  stagnation  or  subservience  to 
authority ;  we  do  not  want  union  at  the  price  of  mental 
slavery  or  a  flabby  acquiescence  in  tradition.  A 
united  church  might  be  a  menace  to  freedom  of 
thought ;  a  strong,  centralized,  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion would  easily  become  a  tyranny.     Free  discussion 

142 


SHALL  WE  UNITE  THE  CHURCHES?  143 

in  the  older  days  was  only  possible  through  separa- 
tion from  the  mother-church.  But  if  the  new  union 
is  based  upon  a  covenant  and  not  a  creed,  the  drawing 
together  of  churches  should  promote  more  discussion 
rather  than  choke  it.  At  present  each  sect  is  pock- 
eted, the  thought  of  its  members  revolving  within  a 
narrow  circle ;  let  them  flow  together,  and  the  oppos- 
ing ideas,  freely  meeting,  should  produce  thought  of 
a  higher  caliber. 

To  some  extent,  the  rivalry  of  the  sects  has  stimu- 
lated a  healthy  ambition  for  growth  and  enterprise  — 
just  as  the  competitive  system  in  industry  has  been  a 
spur  to  efficiency.  But  just  as  industry  gains  greatly 
in  productiveness  through  the  pooling  of  interests,  so 
the  churches  could  do  far  more  effective  work  by 
merging  their  efforts.  There  can  be  a  wholesome 
rivalry  between  the  individual  churches,  without  the 
duplications  and  divisions  of  denominationalism. 
Sectarianism  has  done  its  work  of  stirring  things  up, 
the  old  crusts  are  broken ;  the  fostering  of  the  Chris- 
tian life  now  needs  systematic  and  scientific  organiza- 
tion. 

There  will  continue,  no  doubt,  to  be  different  tastes 
as  to  the  forms  of  church-services ;  some  will  prefer  a 
highly  ritualistic  and  liturgical  service,  others  a 
simpler  and  more  spontaneous  expression  of  religious 
feelings.  In  the  cities,  neighboring  churches  may 
well  develop  along  different  lines,  to  meet  these  vary- 
ing tastes.  In  the  country  churches  something  of  a 
compromise  must  be  sought,  with  perhaps  different 
degrees  of  formality  on  different  occasions.  But 
there  is  probably  less  difference  in  temperamental 
need  than  is  often  supposed;  these  likings  and  dis- 
likings  are  mostly  a  matter  of  habit,  rather  than  in- 
herent.    Even  if  not  easilv  alterable  in  those  whose 


144  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

tastes  are  formed,  thej  are  readily  cultivable  in  the 
younger  generation.  And  since  they  are  only  means, 
and  of  no  significance  in  themselves,  we  may  safely 
leave  it  to  each  local  church  to  work  out  such  forms 
of  worship  as  its  members  may  happen  to  be  able  to 
agree  upon. 

The  movement  toward  church-unity  springs  not 
from  a  mere  dislike  of  heterogeneity,  but  from  an  irri- 
tation at  waste  of  effort,  at  narrow  parochialism  and 
cliquiness,  at  the  spectacle  of  a  hundred  little  ineffec- 
tive, dogmatic  groups,  where  we  ought  to  have  breadth 
of  vision  and  union  of  effort.  It  is  essentially  the 
passion  to  get  ahead  faster  with  the  work  which  the 
Church  exists  to  do.  At  present  many  towns  and 
cities  are  wastefully  overchurched ;  it  is  not  uncom- 
mon to  find  a  thousand  people  supporting,  meagerly 
and  with  difiiculty,  ^ye  or  six  churches,  with  five  or 
six  shamelessly  underpaid  ministers,^  five  or  six  ex- 
pensive and  ugly  church-buildings,  used  a  few  hours 
a  week  apiece,  and  contributing  nothing  in  taxes  to 
the  community,  and  perhaps  as  many  parsonages,  a 
burden  to  their  occupants  to  run  on  the  salaries  they 
receive.  There  is  probably  very  little  difference  in 
the  preaching;  it  is  a  matter  of  different  labels,  dif- 
ferent denominational  connections,  and  superficial 
differences  in  forms;  what  the  various  labels  really 
meant  to  the  founders  of  the  sects  is  pretty  completely 
forgotten  by  most  of  the  members.  Nothing  really 
separates  most  of  them  but  petty  unreasoned  prej- 
udices and  the  chasms  between  social  sets. 

Here  are  a  couj)le  of  instances  from  a  recent  peri- 
odical :  "  There  is  a  little  town  in  California  with  a 
population  of  1,800  that  has  thirteen  churches  and 

1  The  average  salary  of  the  ministers  in  the  United  States  in  1919 
was  $937. 


SHALL  WE  UNITE  THE  CHURCHES?  145 

twelve  resident  ministers  living  off  the  community, 
plus  what  they  receive  from  Home  Mission  Boards. 
There  is  another  town  in  the  same  State  with  a  popu- 
lation of  50,000  that  has  fifty  denominations  repre- 
sented among  its  churches.  Some  of  these  denomina- 
tions have  several  churches  in  the  town.  Among  the 
fifty  denominations  is  a  church  called  the  ^  Church  of 
God.'  They  had  a  fight  in  this  church  and  the  off- 
shoot from  the  original  church  called  itself  the  ^  True 
Church  of  God.'  This  church  in  turn  had  a  fuss,  and 
a  third  church  was  formed  which  assumed  the  name 
'  The  Only  True  Church  of  God.'  " 

These  are  extreme  instances,  to  be  sure.  But  the 
recent  survey  made  by  the  Interchurch  movement  dis- 
closed many  cases  nearly  as  bad.  In  a  Pennsylvania 
village  of  four  hundred  and  fifty  people  there  are  six 
churches ;  six  churches  in  a  New  England  village  of  a 
hundred  and  fifty  inhabitants.  In  another  eastern 
township  eighteen  churches  minister  to  a  population 
of  about  a  thousand.  The  fact  is  that  in  the  smaller 
towns  and  villages  and  in  the  open  country  there  are 
commonly  not  enough  Christians  of  any  one  denomi- 
nation to  form  a  vigorous  church ;  a  working  union  of 
the  sects  —  if  nothing  closer  can  be  got  —  is  the  sine 
qua  non  of  Christian  efficiency. 

The  needless  multiplication  of  churches  means 
half-filled  pews,  half-hearted  enthusiasms,  a  generally 
dreary  and  depressing  atmosphere,  in  which  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  cultivate  an  eager  spirituality.  It  means  pro- 
vincialism and  prejudice  rampant,  the  initial  vision 
that  launched  each  sect  long  vanished,  and  each  now 
living  on  a  diet  of  half-understood  formulas,  in  a 
backwater  of  its  own,  out  of  the  main  current  of 
thought.  It  means  division  of  forces,  impaired 
prestige,  diminished  power  to  fight  sin  and  wrong. 


146  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

It  means  that  there  is  no  proper  proportioning  of 
church-facilities  to  population,  so  that  while  some 
communities  boast  of  several  church-edifices  within 
sight  of  one  another,  many  small  communities  have 
no  place  of  worship  whatsoever. 

In  Colorado  in  1911,  one  hundred  and  thirty-three 
villages  were  found  to  be  entirely  without  a  Protes- 
tant church,  over  a  hundred  of  them  having  no  church 
of  any  sort.  The  Interchurch  survey  in  1919  dis- 
closed similar  conditions  in  many  places  throughout 
the  country. 

"  In  one  Eastern  State  within  a  radius  of  six  miles 
there  are  thirty-six  town  or  country  churches,  and 
immediately  to  the  side  of  this  area  there  are  two 
well  populated  townships,  containing  very  good  farm- 
ing land,  but  in  which  there  is  only  one  church,  no 
resident  minister  and  over  eleven  hundred  young  peo- 
ple absolutely  out  of  reach  of  any  church  or  Sunday 
school.  In  the  further  West  in  one  whole  county  of 
22,000  inhabitants  only  half  that  number  are  within 
the  range  of  church  ministration  and  only  one-tenth 
of  these  are  actually  reached  by  the  church.  Areas, 
even  as  large  as  1,000  square  miles,  containing  hun- 
dreds of  people  are  churchless.  More  than  three-score 
industrial  communities  within  three  counties  of  an 
Eastern  State,  with  an  approximate  population  of 
100,000,  have  no  church,  Protestant  or  Catholic." 

This  uneven  distribution  of  church-facilities  gives 
point  to  the  remark  of  Dr.  Earl  Taylor: 

"  The  great  problem  of  the  Protestant  churches  is 
not  so  much  to  get  them  together  as  to  keep  them 
apart  —  at  least  half  a  mile  apart.  Churches  have  a 
tendency  to  get  in  each  other's  way." 

In  spite,  however,  of  this  evident  need,  the  obstacles 
in  the  way  of  church-union  are  very  great.     Most  men 


SHALL  WE  UNITE  THE  CHURCHES?  147 

and  women  are  tenacious  in  their  convictions,  how- 
ever ill-founded ;  indeed,  the  more  tenacious  in  propor- 
tion to  the  lack  of  clear  thinking  they  have  done  — 
for  much  thinking  is  bound  to  breed  respect  for  op- 
posing ideas.  They  cling  to  their  particular  brand 
of  theology  with  intense  assurance,  and  to  their  de- 
nominational home  with  loyalty  and  pride.  The  only 
way  to  overcome  this  formidable  obstacle  is  to  show 
these  obstinate  sectarians  that  they  can  hold  their 
views  just  as  earnestly  and  openly  in  a  big  common 
church  as  in  their  separate  corners.  Some  of  the 
larger  churches,  notably  the  Anglican  Church,  in- 
clude, as  it  is,  communicants  of  very  widely  varying 
convictions  and  tastes.  We  do  not  need  to  think 
alike  to  be  able  to  join  together  for  the  purposes  that 
we  have  in  common. 

Most  people,  however,  do  not  want  to  be  disturbed 
in  their  familiar  habits.  They  are  not  sufficiently 
persuaded  of  the  need  of  change;  they  have  no  big 
motive  for  getting  up  out  of  their  ruts.  They  feel 
uneasy  when  detached  from  their  accustomed  denomi- 
national name,  their  accustomed  pew  in  a  particular 
church,  a  particular  minister  and  a  particular  form 
of  service.  Adjustment  in  these  matters  can  only  be 
made  if  the  people  concerned  can  be  brought  to  feel 
the  larger  issues  at  stake. 

Still  more  serious  an  obstacle  is  the  momentum  of 
the  various  denominational  organizations,  the  per- 
sonal ambitions  and  convictions  of  their  officials,  of 
the  editors  and  publishers  of  denominational  jour- 
nals, and  of  the  professors  in  denominational  theo- 
logical schools.  These  schools  and  periodicals  keep 
sectarian  loyalties  alive,  and  bias  students  for  the 
ministry  so  that  they  in  turn  perpetuate  the  paro- 
chialism of  outlook.     The  remedy  would  seem  to  be 


148  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

in  mergers,  in  inter-denominational  schools  and 
journals,  and  in  a  broader  education  for  the  min- 
istry. 

These  sectarian  prejudices  would  be  impossible  if 
the  cliques  that  control  the  churches  had  a  broader 
and  more  accurate  knowledge  of  history.  Such  an 
outlook  would  engender  a  humbler  attitude,  reveal- 
ing the  fact,  for  example,  that  no  one  really  knows 
what  the  original  form  of  Christian  baptism  was;  or 
that  it  is  really  very  doubtful  if  there  was  an  un- 
broken episcopal  line  handing  down  the  headship  of 
the  Church  from  earliest  times ;  or  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  for  example,  was  a  late  and  rather 
haphazard  growth,  a  compromise  or  adjustment  ef- 
fected, as  laws  are  formulated,  through  the  clash  of 
opposing  argument,  with  much  prejudice,  much  heat, 
a  much  less  accurate  knowledge  of  the  life  and  teach- 
ings of  Christ  than  we  have  to-day,  and  very  little  of 
what  Matthew  Arnold  used  to  call  "  sweet  reasonable- 
ness." This  does  not  imply  that  the  dogma  of  the 
Trinity  may  not  embody  a  profound  truth,  or  that  the 
Baptists  may  not  be  correct  in  their  belief  as  to  the 
original  form  of  baptism,  or  the  Episcopalians  in  their 
conception  of  the  Apostolic  Succession.  It  only 
shows  that  all  these  doctrines,  and  the  others  which 
separate  the  sects,  being  matters  upon  which  there  is 
very  meager  and  conflicting  evidence,  ought  to  be  very 
tentatively  held,  with  generous  recognition  of  the 
right  of  contrary  judgment,  and  an  earnest  recogni- 
tion of  the  fact  that  they  do  not  practically  matter. 
Men  are  not  saved  by  correct  belief,  or  damned  for 
incorrect  belief,  with  regard  to  such  matters  as  bap- 
tism or  the  episcopate  or  the  Trinity  —  as  the  great 
majority  prove  that  they  realize  through  the  readi- 
ness with  which  they  transfer  their  membership  from 


SHALL  WE  UNITE  THE  CHURCHES?  149 

one  sect  to  another  upon  marriage,  or  a  change  of 
residence. 

Certainly  these  sectarian  prejudices  would  be  im- 
possible if  people  generally  had  the  passion  for  get- 
ting the  greatest  possible  amount  of  service  done. 
You  don't  quarrel  over  theology  when  you  are  at  war 
and  the  battle  is  on !  The  essential  thing  is  to  spread 
the  conception  of  Christianity  as  a  crusade  —  a  war 
to  the  death  against  sin  and  wrong;  when  we  are  ab- 
sorbed in  that  campaign  —  our  whole  heart  in  the 
Master's  business,  we  shall  have  no  patience  with 
anything  that  weakens  our  forces  or  keeps  us  apart. 
Just  as  the  American  colonies  had  to  unite  to  win 
their  independence,  just  as  the  Allies  had  to  merge 
their  commands  in  the  recent  war,  so  the  churches 
must  unite  in  the  far  greater  and  longer  war  which 
they  exist  to  wage. 

We  shall  never  unite  on  theology,  that  is  clear. 
We  ought  not  to  unite  on  theology,  lest  we  petrify 
thought  and  cramp  its  progress.  We  do  not  need  to 
unite  on  theology,  for  differences  in  theology  are  com- 
patible with  a  common  platform  —  a  common  pro- 
gram of  duties.  The  hope  for  union  lies  now,  not  as 
it  did  for  so  long,  in  repressing  variations,  but  in  mak- 
ing them  non-essential.  It  lies  in  the  possibility  of 
an  awakened  realization  of  what  a  Church,  united  in 
its  hatred  of  evil,  could  accomplish  —  in  a  passion 
for  the  speedy  coming  of  the  Kingdom  of  God. 

Happily,  practical  interests  are  driving  us  in  this 
direction  —  the  higher  cost  of  living,  which  is  making 
it  impossible  to  support  so  many  ministers,  the  in- 
creased cost  of  maintaining  and  heating  church- 
buildings,  and  the  growing  spirit  of  organization  and 
economy  in  business,  which  cannot  fail  to  influence 
ecclesiastical    policy.     But    especially    the    war,    by 


150  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

putting  men  of  all  creeds  shoulder  to  slioulder  in  a 
common  enterprise,  has  made  sectarian  differences 
seem  as  insignificant  as  they  are.  And  the  absence 
of  so  many  pastors  at  the  front  has  forced  many  con- 
gregations to  meet  together  temporarily,  and  taught 
them  thereby  that  differences  in  tradition  do  not  pre- 
vent common  work  and  worship. 

Just  what  do  we  mean,  now,  when  we  speak  of 
Christian  unity?  There  are  two  possibilities.  One 
is  that  the  denominations  shall  be  kept,  and  joined  in 
a  practical  working  union,  mapping  out  and  dividing 
up  unoccupied  territory,  cancelling  all  needless 
churches,  and  working  together  for  social  service, 
missions  and  educational  effort.  On  this  plan  every 
one  would  join  the  nearest  church,  of  whatever  de- 
nomination it  might  be,  and  the  smaller  communities 
would  have  but  one  community-church,  here  of  one 
denomination  and  there  of  another.  Such  a  work- 
ing arrangement  would  quickly  make  denominational 
differences  meaningless,  and  might  eventually  result 
in  a  completer  union. 

The  other  possibility  is  that  in  each  overchurched 
community  the  congregations  unite  to  form  a  multi- 
denominational  or  an  undenominational  church. 
This  has  the  advantage  that,  for  example.  Episcopal- 
ians are  not  obliged  to  attend  a  Congregational 
church,  or  vice  versa;  by  a  general  surrender  of  labels 
no  one  will  feel  himself  an  alien  in  the  common 
church-home.  Especially  the  great  masses  of  the 
"  unchurched,"  who  usually  distrust  denominational 
labels  and  particularisms,  are  more  likely  to  be  at- 
tracted, and  the  church  more  likely  to  be  actually  as 
well  as  in  theory  a  genuine  reflection  of  the  religious 
life  of  the  whole  community. 

The   objection   is    often    raised   to   these    "  union 


SHALL  WE  UNITE  THE  CHURCHES?  151 

churches/'  that  the  lack  of  outside  supervision,  of  a 
central  organization  to  lean  upon  for  advice  and  help, 
is  a  serious  drawback.  They  have  not  a  regular  min- 
isterial supply  to  draw  upon.  They  are  less  likely 
to  interest  themselves  in  missionary  work  outside  the 
immediate  community.  They  are  apt  to  develop  dis- 
cords through  lack  of  overhead  supervision.  But  all 
of  these  difficulties  could  be  remedied  by  a  central- 
ized organization  of  undenominational  churches.  If 
the  churches  were  taken  away  entirely  from  sectarian 
control  and  run  as  the  schools  are,  by  the  community, 
as  a  public  concern  too  important  to  be  left  to  private 
interests,  we  might  perhaps  see  a  renaissance  of  re- 
ligion parallel  to  the  development  of  education  since 
that  great  field  of  human  activity  passed  into  the 
hands  of  the  public.  The  union  of  Church  and  State 
was  dangerous  so  long  as  the  Church  was  autocratic 
and  dogmatic;  make  it  democratic,  a  federation  of 
free  local  organizations;  make  it  undogmatic,  a  place 
where  thought  may  be  free  and  fearless ;  and  we  may 
again  let  it  become  an  institution  belonging  to  the 
community  as  a  whole. 

Whatever  the  exact  plan  of  union,  or  federation,  its 
consummation  is  apparently  going  to  be  a  slow  de- 
velopment. The  leaders  of  thought,  the  spiritual 
seers,  are  for  the  most  part  eager  for  it ;  but  the  ma- 
jority of  church-members,  and  usually  the  "  pillars  '' 
of  the  churches,  the  little  groups  that  manage  mat- 
ters, are  wedded  to  the  present  chaos.  We  must  have 
patience,  tact,  good-temper;  w^e  must  be  opportunists, 
glad  to  take  any  step  that  seems  immediately  useful 
in  any  place,  and  willing  to  tolerate  confusion  for  a 
long  time  yet.  But  eventually,  as  Dr.  J.  E.  McAfee 
has  declared,^  "  Religion,  like  every  other  universal 

1  In  an  article  in  the  'New  Republic  for  January  18,  1919. 


152  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

human  concern,  must  be  brought  under  community 
control  if  democracy  is  fully  to  vindicate  itself." 

The  centripetal  forces  are  already  prevailing  over 
the  centrifugal.  Presbyterians,  Methodists,  Baptists 
are  harmonizing  their  factions.  Some  of  the  smaller 
denominations  are  dying  out.  The  increasing  realiz- 
ation of  the  crisis  in  the  Church  will  work  for  further 
unification.  But  it  is  essential  to  stir  the  imagina- 
tion and  rouse  the  faith  of  the  multitude  of  church- 
people;  a  successful  union  cannot  be  engineered  from 
above ;  it  can  only  be  reached  through  a  great  popular 
desire.  We  must  preach  unceasingly  that  what  mat- 
ters is  not  whether  one  is  Episcopalian  or  Methodist 
or  Unitarian,  but  whether  one  hates  evil  and  is  eager 
to  learn  to  do  well;  not  whether  a  church  practises 
baptism  by  immersion  or  by  pouring  or  by  sprinkling, 
but  whether  it  stands  for  righteousness,  and  works 
wdth  eagerness  and  consecration  for  its  prevailing. 
If  that  scale  of  values  is  kept  in  mind,  we  shall,  slowly 
but  surely,  approach  the  day  when  we  shall  be  so  con- 
scious of  our  essential  unity  that  we  shall  come  to- 
gether, at  last,  as  one  flock,  one  Shepherd  —  the  great 
universal  Church  of  Christ. 


CHAPTEE  THIRTEEN 

IS    MISSIONARY    ENTERPRISE    DESIRABLE? 

There  can  be  no  serious  doubt  of  tlie  desirability 
of  uniting  all  Christians  into  one  Church  on  the  basis 
of  the  endeavor  to  realize  the  Christian  ideal  of  life. 
A  more  difficult  question  arises,  however,  with  regard 
to  the  non-Christian  churches.  Should  we  look  for- 
ward to  fraternizing  with  them,  as  coequal  members 
in  a  spiritual  union  wider  than  Christianity,  or 
should  we  undertake  to  convert  as  many  as  possible 
of  them  to  our  Church,  and  hope  for  the  eventual 
"  evangelization  "  of  the  world  ? 

Before  we  can  intelligently  discuss  this  problem, 
we  must  get  away  from  the  older  conception  that 
Christianity  is  the  one  divine,  God-given,  ultimate 
religion,  whereas  the  other  religions  are  man-made 
impostures,  deserving  of  no  sympathy  or  recognition. 
True  believers  vs.  heathen,  saved  vs.  lost  —  all  the 
arrogant,  patronizing,  complacent  superiority  that 
those  words  imply  must  be  stamped  out,  and  replaced 
by  a  genuine  recognition  of  the  brotherhood  of  all 
men.  All  religions  are  man-made,  all  are  imperfect, 
all,  if  judged  by  their  intent,  have  something  of  the 
divine  in  them,  all,  if  judged  by  the  practice  of  their 
disciples,  have  a  great  deal  that  is  evil.  We  may  well 
deem  our  own  religion  best,  as  we  deem  our  own 
country  best.  But  just  as  patriotism  does  not  rightly 
preclude  a  recognition  of  the  worth  of  other  countries 
than  our  own,  so  religious  loyalty  should  not  imply 

153 


154  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

a  blindness  to  the  significance  and  the  insights  of 
other  faiths. 

The  first  prerequisite  of  missionarying  —  if  there 
is  to  be  missionarying  —  should  be  a  sympathetic  un- 
derstanding of  the  indigenous  religions  of  the  land 
to  be  visited.  In  a  time  when  Protestant  Christians 
rather  generally  look  down  upon  Catholics,  and 
Episcopalian  Protestants  upon  Unitarian  Protes- 
tants, it  is  a  good  deal  to  expect  a  Christian  to  feel 
any  genuine  sympathy  with  Buddhism  or  Moham- 
medanism. The  dogmas  and  practices  of  alien  re- 
ligions seem  as  uncouth  as  their  manners  and  cus- 
toms. We  forget  that  it  is  largely  a  matter  of  bring- 
ing-up  —  that  our  creeds  and  rituals  seem  as  barbaric 
and  irrational  to  them  —  and  with  about  as  good  a 
right!  We  forget  that  their  ideals  are  such  as  we 
might  have  shared  if  we  had  had  their  racial  experi- 
ences and  hopes  —  just  as  they  forget,  when  scrutiniz- 
ing the  strange  phrases  of  our  creeds,  that  just  such 
a  garment  might  have  been  woven  for  their  own 
thought  if  they  had  lived  in  the  days  and  under  the 
stresses  of  the  men  who  devised  these  formulae. 

We  must  plainly  recognize,  for  one  thing,  that  most 
religious  beliefs  are  not  literally,  but  only  practically, 
true.  That  is,  the  statements  which  men  are  asked 
to  accept,  while  not  literally  exact,  yet  enshrine  a 
genuine  insight,  convey  a  useful  message.  This  holds 
of  many  formulas  besides  those  of  religion.  For  ex- 
ample, when  we  read  in  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence that  "  all  men  are  created  equal,"  we  cannot  take 
that  literally;  we  are  born  very  unequal  in  talents, 
in  physique,  in  good  looks,  as  well  as  in  opportunity. 
The  phrase,  however,  has  been  cherished  by  genera- 
tions of  Americans  because  it  pithily  expresses  the 
truth  that  all  men  ought  to  have,  as  nearly  as  possible. 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      155 

equality  of  opportunity,  and  to  be  equal  before  the 
law. 

Many  illustrations  might  be  drawn  from  the  Bible. 
For  example,  when  Jesus  says,  "  Ask  and  it  shall  be 
given  you,  seek  and  ye  shall  find,  knock  and  it  shall 
be  opened  unto  you,"  his  assertions  sound  like  a  prom- 
ise, and  have  been  quite  generally  so  construed. 
Common  sense  points  out  that  many  who  ask  do  not 
receive,  many  who  seek  do  not  find.  And  yet  the 
saying  is  not  thereby  discredited;  for  it  was  by  no 
means  a  mere  exaggeration,  whose  exacter  rendition 
would  read,  "  To  some  who  ask  shall  it  be  given,  etc." 
No,  what  the  saying  conveys  is  rather  the  truth  that 
the  way  to  find  is  to  seek ;  nothing  is  to  be  won  unless 
one  bestirs  oneself  to  attain  it.  It  is  parallel  to  the 
common  proverb,  "  Where  there's  a  will  there's  a 
way."  Literally,  that  is  untrue ;  in  many  cases  where 
there  is  a  will,  there  is  no  way.  But  this  proverb, 
like  the  Gospel  saying,  is  not  to  be  dismissed  as  a 
statement  of  probability  —  it  is,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
not  a  probability,  not  literally  true  even  in  a  majority 
of  cases.  Still  less  is  it  merely  a  statement  of  what 
sometimes  happens;  such  a  statement  would  have  no 
hortatory  value.  It  is  rather  a  veiled  but  highly  ef- 
fective way  of  conveying  the  important  lesson  that  it 
takes  determination  to  succeed.  "  If  you  would  find 
a  way,  you  must  have  the  will  to  find  it."  "  If  you 
wish  a  door  opened  you  must  knock." 

Now  the  point  to  notice  is  that  the  effectiveness  of 
these  elliptical  sayings  would  be  seriously  impaired 
by  such  an  alteration  of  phraseology  as  would  make 
them  literally  true  and  unambiguous.  It  is,  there- 
fore, not  desirable,  from  the  point  of  view  of  emo- 
tional value,  to  replace  them  by  the  exacter  state- 
ments.    Clearness  of  thought  is  not  the  greatest  good ; 


156  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

and  it  is  generaUy  wise  to  suffer  the  ambiguity,  and 
the  misapprehensions  of  those  who  stand  outside, 
rather  than  to  lessen  the  power  which  the  ambiguous 
utterances  contain. 

Take,  for  example,  the  oft-reiterated  doctrine  of 
Christian  Science  — "  There  is  no  evil !  "  To  the  rest 
of  mankind  this  is  the  sheerest  nonsense.  And  yet, 
watch  the  illumination  that  comes  to  the  convert,  see 
what  a  new  and  profound  insight  into  human  life  he 
has  discovered;  see  the  effects  in  his  actually  trans- 
figured consciousness.  For  him  there  is  no  more  evil 
forthwith.  This  refers,  of  course,  to  those  who  really 
grasp  the  secret;  that  they  do  possess  a  great  secret 
we  can  not  deny,  or  deny  only  because  we  have  not 
personally  seen  the  transformation  wrought.  So  far 
as  practical  truth  goes,  they  are  right  and  the  scoffers 
wrong.  The  present  writer  has  elsewhere  phrased 
that  truth  thus :  "  Evils  must  not  exist  for  us,  must 
not  find  a  place  in  our  world.  Whatever  is  not  good 
or  beautiful  or  pleasant  is  to  be  counted  out,  thrown 
overboard,  forgotten ;  is  to  be  as  if  it  were  not.  Just 
as  when  we  adopt  any  ideal  we  cease  to  compute  and 
calculate,  but  throw  ourselves  whole-heartedly  on  that 
side,  so  in  our  emotional  reaction  upon  life  we  are  to 
have  eyes  only  for  the  good  and  refuse  to  see  anything 
else.  It  is  treating  the  world  as  we  ought  to  treat 
our  wives  and  mothers  and  dearest  friends;  it  is  our 
world,  we  love  it  and  are  loyal  to  it,  for  us  it  shall 
have  no  faults."  ^  There  is  no  illusion  mingled  with 
this  statement.  But  it  is  doubtful  if  any  one  would 
ever  be  led  to  solve  his  personal  problem  of  evil  by 
reading  these  words.  Tens  of  thousands  have  been 
led  to  do  so  by  reading  Mrs.  Eddy's  words.  And 
the  reason  lies  not  merely  in  the  illusion  fostered  by 

1  Problems  of  Religion,  p.  210. 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      157 

taking  lier  words  literally  —  there  are  some  Christian 
Scientists  at  least  who  have  little  illusion  about  it  — 
but  also,  to  some  extent,  in  the  suggestive  power  of  her 
literally  untrue  statements  which  is  lacking  in  the 
more  sophisticated  phraseology.  Unfortunate  as,  for 
our  clearness  of  thinking,  it  may  be,  it  seems  true  that 
we  need  the  paradoxical  form  of  assertion. 

Similarly,  the  doctrine  of  Salvation  by  Faith,  as 
expressed  by  Luther,  or  Wesley,  or  in  the  traditional 
Christian  creeds,  sounds  like  a  piece  of  theological 
speculation  which  the  intellectually  scrupulous 
should  hasten  to  disavow.  Yet  to  reject  it  would 
mean  to  discountenance  a  method  of  saving  men  from 
sin  which  has  been,  and  may  still  be,  of  enormous 
efficacy.  We  might  explain  the  psychology  of  the 
process  somewhat  as  follows :  ^'  The  unhappy  sinner, 
in  many  cases,  has  the  power  to  live  aright  locked  up 
in  his  heart,  but  unable  to  get  control  of  him  because 
it  is  blocked  by  the  realization  of  his  sinfulness;  the 
formation  of  new  habits  is  interfered  with  by  his  very 
concentration  of  thought  upon  his  previous  failures. 
Suddenly  he  is  told  that  he  need  not  think  of  his 
temptations  any  longer,  that  he  has  but  to  let  go,  yield 
himself  up  to  Christ,  or  to  God,  and  he  will  be  saved. 
The  suggestion  of  the  possession  of  power  is  potent 
enough  to  make  the  power  actually  sufficient.  The 
mind  is  fixed  upon  the  goal  instead  of  upon  the  ob- 
stacles, is  freed  from  the  demoralization  that  comes 
from  a  remembrance  of  past  weakness,  and  lives  in 
the  atmosphere  of  attainment."  ^  This  highly  im- 
portant truth  is  contained  in  the  Pauline  doctrine; 
Paul  himself  was  actually  so  saved  from  his  life  of 
restlessness  and  moral  failure.  And  so,  however  fan- 
tastic, literally  taken,  the  dogma  of  Justification  by 

ilbid.,  p.  182. 


158  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

Faith  may  seem,  we  must  confess  it  to  be  a  very  use- 
ful means  of  preserving  and  revealing  to  men  a  great 
practical  truth  which  without  it  might  have  been  lost 
to  Christian  experience  for  centuries. 

These  illustrations  might  be  indefinitely  multiplied. 
Almost  every  sect  and  school  has  stood  champion  for 
some  practical  truth,  for  some  truth  which  it  has 
found  to  be  significant,  and  whose  denial  would  mean 
a  vital  loss.  It  has  phrased  this  truth  in  language 
which  was  not  literally  true.  The  literal  untruth  of 
statement  has  aroused  the  antagonism  of  the  other 
sects  and  schools  that  have  not  been  on  the  inside, 
seen  into  the  real  practical  meaning  of  the  doctrine, 
or  felt  its  power.  Most  of  the  objections  to  Christian 
dogmas  have  been  proper,  if  the  dogmas  are  to  be 
taken  literally.  But  on  the  other  hand,  most  of  those 
dogmas  have  been  right,  and  important,  and  precious, 
if  we  look  to  the  practical  truth  which  they  enshrine. 

Indeed,  the  whole  orthodox  scheme  is,  after  all,  but 
a  set  of  symbols  of  moral  and  inward  truths.  Much 
that  is  deepest  and  most  sacred  in  the  spiritual  life 
of  the  race  has  clothed  itself  in  this  language,  so  that 
if  that  were  taken  away  it  would  scarcely  know  how 
else  to  embody  itself,  and  would  in  no  small  degree 
perish  from  lack  of  an  adequate  medium  of  expres- 
sion. All  religious  ideas  have  to  clothe  themselves 
in  the  concepts  of  a  particular  time  and  place;  or- 
thodox Christianity  took  up  the  language  of  the  first 
three  Christian  centuries  in  the  Greek  and  Latin 
lands.  Its  meaning,  its  emotional  values,  reveal 
themselves  to  us  who  grow  up  under  the  ministrations 
of  the  Church.  But  to  outsiders,  to  Mohammedans 
and  Jews  and  Buddhists  and  Confucians,  it  seems 
merely  fantastic,  irrational,  and  quite  obviously  un- 
true. 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      159 

Now  if  this  is  true  of  Christianity,  in  its  tradi- 
tional expressions,  it  is  equally  true  of  the  alien  re- 
ligions. To  us,  without  special  initiation,  they  are 
bound  to  seem  crude  and  meaningless  and  false. 
Every  religion  has  had  its  term  —  Gentiles,  barba- 
rians, heathen  —  to  indicate  the  followers  of  all  the 
others.  And  yet  each  of  these  religions,  when  seen 
from  the  inside,  will  be  found  to  be  throbbing  with 
significance,  and  potent  in  moulding  the  lives  of  its 
adherents. 

"  Which  has  not  taught  weak  wills  how  much  they  can. 
Which  has  not  fall'n  on  the  dry  heart  like  rain. 
Which  has  not  cried  to  sunk,  self -weary  man: 
Thou  must  be  born  again ! " 

Emerson  was  right  when  he  said,  "  The  religions  we 
now  call  false  were  once  true.''  And  are  still  true 
to  those  who  grow  up  in  them,  although  to  the  rest  of 
us,  who  see  only  their  verbal  formulations,  empty  of 
their  soul  of  meaning,  they  are  quite  palpable  un- 
truths. 

What  we  need,  then,  is,  first  of  all,  to  learn  to 
understand  these  non-Christian  religions,  to  see  them 
through  the  eyes  of  their  converts;  not  to  compare 
their  superstitious  side  with  the  best  side  of  our 
religion,  but,  in  all  fairness,  to  take  them  at  their 
best,  as  we  wish  our  faith  taken  at  its  best.  This  is 
a  very  different  attitude  from  that  usually  taken  by 
missionaries.  They  commonly  point  out  to  us  a  few 
glaring  evils  countenanced  or  fostered  by  the  religion 
—  the  status  of  women  in  Mohammedan  countries, 
the  needless  self-sacrifice  of  young  widows  in  India. 
As  if  we  were  not  the  scandal  of  mankind  for  our 
lynchings,  and  our  drunkenness,  and  our  slums! 
Mohammedanism  has  fought  the  curse  of  alcoholism 


160  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

far  more  successfully  than  we ;  ^  Buddhism  has  re- 
moved the  predacious  and  militaristic  impulses  from 
men  far  more  successfully  than  Christianity.  Why 
not  see  the  best  in  all  these  faiths  and  seek  to  in- 
corporate it  in  our  own,  instead  of  spending  all  our 
efforts  in  attempts  to  stamp  out  all  that  is  sacred  to 
them  and  to  replace  their  ideals  and  loyalties  by  our 
own? 

Christian  humility  has  almost  always  been  coupled 
with  a  fierce,  if  unconscious,  opiniativeness  and  pride. 
If  Christianity  is  ever  to  deserve  to  conquer  the 
world,  it  will  only  be  by  giving  up  its  cocksureness, 
its  sense  of  having  all  the  wisdom  on  its  side,  by  hold- 
ing out  a  hand  of  fellowship  to  these  others  and  pre- 
vailing over  them  by  its  greater  reasonableness  and 
its  wider  sympathy.  Instead  of  seeing  the  motes  in 
its  neighbors'  eyes,  it  should  be  removing  the  beams 
from  its  own. 

Take,  for  example,  such  a  book  as  Henry  Fielding- 
Hall's  The  Soul  of  a  People.  Here  was  a  man  who 
lived  among  the  Burmese  Buddhists  until  he  came 
to  love  them,  and  to  love  the  faith  that  inspired  them. 
It  is  difficult  to  see  how  any  one  could  read  the  pages 
of  this  book  without  feeling  that,  in  many  ways,  their 
religion  is  the  blood-brother  of  our  own;  and  if  you 
know  the  history  of  Buddhism,  you  know  that  it  has 
kept  free  from  some  of  the  worst  faults  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church.  Buddha  taught  the  doctrine  of  the 
Brotherhood  of  Man  and  the  law  of  Universal  Love 
five  or  six  hundred  years  before  Christ ;  and  there  are 
many  close  parallels  between  the  Buddhistic  and  the 
Christian  sayings.     Buddhism  has  been  far  less  opti- 

1  This  was  written  before  the  Prohibition  Amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States.  It  still  applies  to  Christian  Europe 
and  the  other  American  nations. 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      161 

mistic,  less  virile,  less  militant,  less  imbued  with  the 
spirit  of  active  service;  but  it  has  had  the  merits  of 
its  defects  —  it  has  had  little  intolerance,  no  inquisi- 
tions, no  persecutions,  no  bloody  crusades. 

What  then?  Ought  we  to  try  to  supplant  such  a 
religion  by  our  own?  The  missionaries  can  point  to 
thousands  of  converts  who  are  far  happier  and  more 
moral  than  they  were  before  they  found  the  Christian 
gospel.  But  to  offset  that,  there  is  the  side  of  which 
the  missionaries  seldom  tell,  and  which  few  of  them 
perhaps  realize  —  the  anguish  of  heart  that  comes 
from  breaking  old  ties,  and  the  sadness  of  friends  and 
relatives  who  see  their  loved  ones  drawn  off  into  what 
is  to  them  an  alien  fold.  Robert  Louis  Stevenson, 
writing  once  to  a  prospective  missionary,  said :  "  Re- 
member that  you  cannot  change  ancestral  feelings  of 
right  and  wrong  without  what  is  practically  soul- 
murder.  Barbarous  as  the  customs  may  seem,  al- 
ways hear  them  with  patience,  always  judge  them 
with  gentleness,  always  find  in  them  some  seed  of 
good,  see  that  you  always  develop  them;  remember 
that  all  you  can  do  is  to  civilize  the  man  in  the  line 
of  his  own  civilization,  such  as  it  is.'' 

Surely  the  name  "  Christian  "  is  not  important,  or 
the  expansion  of  any  particular  church.  What  is  im- 
portant is  the  spiritual  development  of  mankind.  It 
is  a  question  of  psychology :  which  is  the  more  effec- 
tive way  to  spiritualize  the  lives  of  the  non-Christian 
peoples  —  to  convert  them  to  our  religion  or  to  leaven 
their  own  religion  with  new  spirituality  and  insight, 
and  make  the  transition  without  breaking  continuity? 
The  problem  is  much  the  same  as  that  which  con- 
fronts us  when,  in  impatience  at  the  irrationalities 
and  unspirituality  of  contemporary  Christian 
churches,  we  wonder  whether  we  had  better  abandon 


162  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

them  for  a  new  and  more  ideal  organization,  or 
whether  we  should  endeavor  to  make  the  existing 
churches  the  vehicle  of  our  new  insights  and  ideals. 

No  doubt  the  answer  will  be  different  in  different 
cases.  It  is  good  for  a  church  to  be  a  missionary 
church,  in  some  sense.  But  the  sense  may  be  that  of 
giving  to  other  peoples  our  ideals,  and  leaving  it  to 
them  to  w^ork  these  ideals  up  into  forms  suitable  to 
their  national  character  and  culture.  Surely  it  is 
Prussianism  in  religion  to  attempt  to  stamp  our  re- 
ligious culture  upon  them,  instead  of  helping  them 
to  develop  their  own.  Some  of  these  non-Christian 
religions  are  very  much  alive  and  even  aggressive, 
trying  to  regain  the  losses  they  have  suffered  through 
Christian  propaganda.  It  is  becoming  less  and  less 
easy  to  convert  the  more  awakened  Asiatic  peoples 
to  our  faith.  Certainly  much  of  Christianity  —  all 
that  is  essential  in  it  —  can  be  accepted  by  these  other 
religions,  or  by  some,  at  least,  of  them  without  aban- 
donment of  their  allegiance  to  their  inherited  faith. 
Wherever,  as  in  many  places  at  present,  a  great  deal 
of  effort  and  money  is  being  spent  in  fruitless  efforts 
at  changing  the  allegiance  of  these  peoples,  it  may 
well  be  better  to  work  with  them,  and  to  help  them, 
while  preserving  their  name  and  traditions,  to  in- 
corporate what  we  have  to  offer  that  is  precious  and 
true. 

More  and  more  missionaries  are  going  in  something 
like  this  spirit  —  not  as  if  they  had  the  whole  truth, 
and  were  to  preach  to  men  w^andering  in  outer  dark- 
ness, but  eager  to  cooperate  with  whatever  currents 
of  spiritual  life  they  can  find,  and  instead  of  antag- 
onizing the  resident  religious  organizations,  to 
breathe  into  them  the  spirit  of  the  Christian  Gospel. 

There  are,  of  course,  religions  that  are  not  worth 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      163 

saving,  religions  that  are  decaying,  or  are  hopelessly 
cruel,  irrational,  or  nnfrnitful.  There  are  great 
masses  of  foreigners,  as  there  are  masses  of  Ameri- 
cans, who  have  no  religion  worthy  the  name.  In 
many  such  cases  the  founding  and  fostering  of  Chris- 
tian churches  is  clearly  the  best  thing  that  could  be 
done.  But  even  here,  it  is  necessary  to  guard  against 
the  imposing  upon  these  ignorant  men  and  women 
dogmas  which  will  inevitably  be  almost  meaningless 
to  them,  or  dogmas  which  are  rapidly  becoming  ob- 
solescent in  our  own  land.  Far  too  much  of  mis- 
sionary effort  has  been  spent  in  teaching  the  mentally 
helpless  savage  supposed  truths  which  he  or  his  de- 
scendants must,  very  likely  in  agony  of  spirit,  un- 
learn. It  gives  a  shock  to  go  to  foreign  lands  and 
find  Chinese,  Hindoos,  African  negroes,  wrangling 
over  theological  disputes  which  our  forefathers 
elaborated  generations  ago,  which  have  been  almost 
forgotten  over  here  —  and  which,  in  any  case,  are  as 
exotic  and  as  irrelevant  to  their  real  needs  as  a  Bud- 
dhist pagoda  in  a  New  England  village. 

Missions  can  no  longer  be  naively  justified  by  the 
command  attributed  by  earlv  tradition  to  the  risen 
Christ :  "  Go  ye  forth  into  all  the  world  and  preach 
the  Gospel  to  every  creature."  They  have  to  be  justi- 
fied by  their  fruits,  and  those  fruits  estimated  by 
weighing  the  testimony  of  different  classes  of  observ- 
ers. There  are  at  present  over  ten  thousand  mission- 
aries from  the  United  States  alone  in  foreign  coun- 
tries, with  some  fifty  thousand  native  helpers.  Our 
people  expend  more  than  twenty-five  million  dollars 
a  year  in  supporting  them.  Urgent  appeals  are  con- 
tinually made  by  the  Missionary  Boards  for  more 
workers,  more  money.  The  recent  survey  by  the 
Interchurch  movement  directed  attention  to  tracts 


164  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

in  Asia,  Africa  and  South  America  where  millions 
of  natives  are  as  yet  unmissioned,  and  called  for 
thirty-five  hundred  recruits  within  a  year,  for  ten 
thousand  recruits  within  five  years.  Young  people 
are  gathered  together  at  great  student  conferences, 
and  eloquent  pulpit-orators  do  their  best  to  stir  them 
emotionally  and  get  their  pledge  to  devote  their  lives 
to  this  work.  Those  who  go  are  among  our  choicest 
young  men  and  women,  those  whose  work  and  influ- 
ence could  be  of  enormous  value  in  Christianizing 
our  own  land  and  solving  the  intricate  and  baffling- 
problems  of  its  muddled  political  and  social  order. 
If  the  drafting  away  of  this  army  of  our  best  and 
most  devoted  youths  is  to  be  justified,  it  must  be  by 
very  great  and  indisputable  results. 

Hence  we  must  listen  thoughtfully  when  so  keen  an 
observer  as  Lord  Curzon  says,  "  There  seems,  at  least 
to  my  mind,  to  be  small  doubt  that  the  cause  of  Chris- 
tianity is  not  advancing  with  a  rapidity  in  the  least 
commensurate  with  the  prodigious  outlay  of  money, 
self-sacrifice,  and  human  power."  We  must  realize 
that  it  is  not  so  easy  to  gain  converts  as  it  once  was, 
especially  in  the  Asiatic  lands,  because  of  the  rapid 
growth  of  national  self -consciousness  and  the  renewal 
of  indigenous  ideals.  Missionary  effort  of  the 
proselyting  sort  is  bound  to  encounter  heavier  and 
heavier  opposition  —  not  persecution,  as  in  the  early 
days,  but  a  silent  resentment  and  antipathy  which 
will  be  far  more  disastrous. 

The  Asiatic  peoples  have  learned  too  much  of  west- 
ern civilization  in  recent  years  to  be  able  to  idealize 
it.  They  are  coming  to  see  its  unchristian  industrial 
order,  its  imperialism  in  politics,  its  selfish,  competi- 
tive scramble,  its  wanton  luxury  and  worldliness.  A 
feeling  is  growing  up  that  their  own  evils  are,  after 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      165 

all,  no  worse  than  those  of  Christendom.  They  find 
offensive  the  implication  of  missions,  that  their 
morals  are  inferior  and  in  need  of  being  replaced  by 
Christian  standards.  The  educated  Hindoo  or  Jap- 
anese regards  this  attitude  as  insulting  to  the  tradi- 
tions and  ideals  of  his  homeland.  The  missionary  is 
to  him  an  impudent  interloper,  who  had  better  mind 
his  own  business.  Often,  of  course,  there  is  a  gen- 
uine appreciation  of  the  earnestness  and  devotion  of 
the  missionary,  often  there  is  an  amused  tolerance  of 
his  bigotry,  his  partisan  zeal,  his  desire  to  "  save  '^ 
the  people  among  whom  he  comes  to  live.  But  often 
there  is  irritation  and  contempt.  How  can  a  Chris- 
tian offer  his  religion  to  the  Hindoo,  whose  land  is 
held  in  subjugation  by  a  Christian  conqueror?  How 
can  he  preach  the  virtues  of  Christianity  to  the 
Chinese,  whose  land  has  been  the  victim  of  the  greed 
of  one  after  another  Christian  nation?  How  can  he 
have  the  nerve  to  try  to  "  save  "  the  Japanese,  with 
their  fierce  racial  pride,  their  passionately  espoused 
codes  of  manners  and  morals,  their  sense  of  their  na- 
tional achievement? 

This  is  clear:  if  missionary  enterprise  is  to  persist 
in  these  lands  that  are  awakening  to  self-conscious- 
ness, it  must  be  a  different  sort  of  missionarying 
from  that  of  the  old  days.  We  cannot  go  to  them 
proclaiming  the  sinfulness  of  their  accepted  stand- 
ards and  the  lost  state  of  their  fathers  and  friends. 
We  must  recognize  that  their  sacred  books  are  full  of 
sublime  teachings,  precepts  as  lofty  as  those  in  our 
own  sacred  Book.  We  must  confess  that  if  they  have 
cruel  and  inhumane  practices,  so  have  we.  We  must 
be  willing  to  work  hand  in  hand  with  their  growing 
spirit  of  nationalism,  and  help  them  to  form  churches 
suitable  to  their  native  aspirations  and  heritage.     If 


166  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

we  go  in  this  spirit,  we  shall  be  welcomed,  and  can 
accomplish  much.     We  can  help  the  Hindoos  to  mit- 
igate their  cruel  and  obstructive  caste  system,  we 
can   cultivate  a  higher  attitude   toward  women   in 
Japan,  a  revolt  against  "  squeeze  ''  in  China.     We  can 
introduce  hospitals,   libraries,  colleges  and  schools, 
teach  modern  conceptions  of  hygiene  and  sanitation! 
We  can,  in  the  doing  of  this,  foster  —  not  so  much  by 
preaching  as  by  example  — a  spirit  of  brotherhood, 
of  kindness  and  charity,  of  service.     We  can  try  to 
arouse  a  new  faith,  a  new  zeal  for  a  better  world. 
All  this  is  Christian  service,  and  is  well  worth  doing. 
It  is  just  what,  essentially,  needs  to  be  done  in  our 
own  land.     The  question,  which  is  most  important, 
to  help  in  the  regeneration  of  these  other  peoples  or 
of  our  own  is  not  easy  to  answer.     Perhaps  the  need 
is  greater  there  — though  to  any  one  who  fully  re- 
alizes the  inhumanity  and  injustice  in  our  own  coun- 
try that  assertion  can  hardly  be  made  with  assurance. 
The  choice  must  be  left  with  the  individual  Christian, 
where  he  shall  work,  at  what  point  he  shall  seek  to 
introduce  the  leaven  of  the  spirit  of  Christ.     It  is 
needed  everywhere,—  in  Asia,  in  Africa,  in  Europe,  in 
our  own  United  States. 

Certainly  the  Christian  Church  must  realize  the 
spiritual  kinship  of  all  peoples,  and  seek  to  unite 
them  rather  than  to  accentuate  divisions.  It  must 
endeavor  not  so  much  to  convert  their  opinions  as  to 
elevate  their  lives;  and  in  this  task  it  can  find  ample 
opportunity  for  the  missionary  zeal  which  now  too 
often  brings  discord  and  the  clash  of  creeds  in  its 
train.  We  shall  fraternize  gladly  with  whatever 
other  bodies  of  men  are  also  seeking  to  make  life 
better  and  nobler;  we  shall  call  Buddhist  and  Moham- 
medan and  Confucian  not  "  heathen  ''  but  brothers ; 


IS  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE  DESIRABLE?      167 

if  those  religions  can  also  purge  themselves  of  their 
superstitions  and  assimilate,  as  Christianity  is  doing, 
the  broadening  ideals  of  humanity,  we  need  not  seek 
to  proselyte  from  their  ranks.  Christianity  at  pres- 
ent is  unquestionably  the  most  alive  and  growing  of 
religions ;  it  is,  as  James  Freeman  Clarke  used  to  say, 
the  "  great  solvent."  But  if  the  religions  of  the  East 
—  now  that  the  East  too  is  waking  up  from  her  long 
slumber  —  show  the  capacity  to  liberalize  themselves, 
to  become  as  broadly  representative  of  human  inter- 
ests, and  as  ardent  in  moral  reform,  we  may  well 
hesitate  to  foist  our  alien  organization  and  traditions 
upon  them.  Keligion  should  not  divide  men,  it 
should  unite  them;  and  the  name  and  ceremonial  of 
a  church  matter  little  so  long  as  the  spirit  of  true 
religion  is  there. 


CHAPTER  FOURTEEN 

SHALL   WE   STAND    BY   THE   CHURCH? 

And  so  we  come  to  the  final  question :  The  Church 
being  what  it  is,  with  such  and  such  a  history,  with 
such  and  such  hopes,  shall  we  stand  by  it  or  shall  we 
turn  our  backs  upon  it  and  leave  it  to  the  dogmatists, 
the  traditionalists,  the  conformers?  When  I  say 
"  we/'  I  address  the  growing  number  of  Liberals, 
men  and  women  of  ideals  and  enlightenment,  who 
will  appraise  and  judge  the  Church  as  they  would 
any  other  human  institution. 

Among  Liberals,  church-going  is  rapidly  on  the 
wane.  Naturally  enough,  for  they  have  abandoned 
many  of  the  beliefs  to  which  most  churches  still  de- 
mand allegiance.  They  often  feel  that  their  attend- 
ance at  church  not  only  wastes  their  time,  but  puts 
their  influence  on  the  side  of  superstition,  cant,  con- 
fusion of  thought;  puts  it  also  on  the  side  of  com- 
placency with  the  existing  order  of  society,  and  so 
actually  retards  the  regeneration  of  that  order. 
They  are  sorry  to  lose  touch  with  what  is  good  in  the 
Church;  but  their  fear  of  being  put  in  a  false  posi- 
tion, and  their  impatience  at  the  obscurantism,  the 
credulity,  the  unenlightenment  of  the  mass  of  church- 
people  is  decisive.  They  who  feel  thus  are  often  those 
of  the  most  scrupulous  integrity,  those  who  take  these 
matters  most  seriously,  and  are  most  eager  to  put 
their  weight  in  the  right  balance.  There  is  much  to 
be  said  for  their  decision. 

168 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  169 

Often,  of  course,  the  Liberal  is  persona  non  grata  in 
the  Church.  But  even  if  he  is  welcomed,  he  is  likely 
to  be  little  helped  or  inspired ;  dogmas  which  are  pre- 
posterous to  his  mind  are  thrust  at  him  as  though  it 
were  a  sin  not  to  profess  them.  Even  the  spiritual 
truth  that  might  feed  his  soul  is  offered  to  him  in 
ways  he  cannot  accept.  The  whole  atmosphere  is  apt 
to  be  stifling  and  oppressive;  the  Church  seems  hope- 
lessly behind  the  times,  and  the  attitude  of  the  best 
people  towards  it  is  largely,  as  Emerson  said,  "  a 
hope  and  a  waiting." 

But  there  is  another  passage  of  Emerson's  which 
may  well  be  pondered.  ^^  Be  not  betrayed  into  un- 
dervaluing the  churches  which  annoy  you  by  their 
bigoted  claims.  ...  I  agree  with  them  more  than  I 
disagree.  I  agree  with  their  heart  and  motive;  my 
discontent  is  with  their  limitations  and  surface  and 
language.  Their  statement  is  grown  as  fabulous  as 
Dante's  Inferno.  Their  purpose  is  as  real  as  Dante's 
sentiment  and  hatred  of  vice."  Little  as  existing 
churches  often  avail  to  help  the  aspiring  soul,  stale 
and  narrow  and  uninspired  as  are  many  of  their 
preachers,  bigoted  and  form-ridden  as  are  many  of 
their  members,  the  Church  is  in  potentiality  and  not 
seldom  in  actuality  the  most  potent  for  good  of  all 
human  institutions. 

From  some  points  of  view  a  new  church,  not  calling 
itself  Christian  or  encumbered  with  any  load  of  tradi- 
tion and  superstition,  would  seem  best  to  suit  our 
needs.  The  Ethical  Culture  Society,  unfortunate  in 
the  coldness  of  its  name,  but  numbering  among  its 
members  not  a  few  earnest  and  spiritual  men,  is  one 
attempt  to  supply  the  need.  The  Fellowship,  or- 
ganized some  years  ago  in  Los  Angeles,  and  since 
renamed  the  Peoples'  Church,  has  aroused  considera- 


170  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

ble  enthusiasm.  The  so-called  Positivist  Church 
(Religion  of  Humanity)  in  England,  the  Union  pour 
I'Action  Morale  in  France  —  these  are  examples  of 
the  new  organizations  that  have  sprung  up  to  take 
the  place  of  the  Christian  Church.  Bare  they  may 
seem  and  lacking  in  all  the  atmosphere  of  a  church 
long  established  and  endeared  to  the  hearts  of  men. 
But  that  would  mend  itself  in  time;  associations 
would  gather,  enthusiasm  would  grow  with  numbers, 
and  traditions  arise. 

It  sometimes  happens  that  a  new  church,  because 
it  answers  more  exactly  to  the  existing  needs  of  men, 
can  do  more  than  one  that  has  become  petrified  in  old 
forms  and  has  ceased  to  represent  living  impulses. 
It  does  not  thrust  the  skeletons  of  ancient  beliefs 
upon  men ;  and  by  putting  its  truth  in  fresh  and  con- 
temporary language  it  may  touch  new  springs  of  emo- 
tion in  them  and  reveal  heights  which  they  had  not 
before  glimpsed. 

Mr.  Henry  Sturt,  in  his  Idea  of  a  Free  Church, 
makes  an  eloquent  plea  for  such  a  brand-new  or- 
ganization. It  is  quite  possible  that  this  century 
may  see  the  founding  of  many  new  churches  upon  the 
basis  of  freedom  of  belief.  But,  after  all,  what  a  sad 
duplication  of  resources,  what  wastefulness  of  hu- 
man effort,  it  would  be !  There  are  far  too  many  or- 
ganizations in  the  field  already ;  if  only  they  could  all 
be  persuaded  to  join  forces,  and  make  the  basis  of 
their  united  communion  broad  enough  for  every 
earnest  and  aspiring  man  and  woman  to  feel  at  home 
in  it,  immeasurably  more  could  be  accomplished. 
The  Christian  Church,  with  her  splendid  historic 
background,  her  hold  on  the  affections  of  the  people 
—  still  very  great  in  spite  of  the  widespread  chafing 
at  her  creeds  —  with  her  loyalty  to  the  commanding 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  171 

personality  of  Christ,  has  a  momentum  and  a  prestige 
that  increase  tenfold  her  power  and  usefulness. 

It  takes  a  happy  inspiration  and  a  peculiar  combi- 
nation of  circumstances  to  launch  successfully  a  new 
religion.  Specially  is  this  so  if  the  new  religion  is 
not  to  be  floated  upon  false  hopes  and  supernatural 
glories.  Religion  is  a  natural  growth,  not  a  made-to- 
order  article ;  the  great  spiritual  seers  —  as  Buddha, 
Christ,  Luther  —  have  been  but  reformers  of  pre- 
existing religions,  and  have  retained  more  than  they 
inaugurated.  It  is  possible  that  a  rational  religion 
might  be  artificially  built  up  and  propagated,  as  an 
artificial  and  rational  language  might  be  —  Esper- 
anto is  making  some  headway.  But  continuity 
counts  for  a  great  deal,  and  the  old  familiar  lan- 
guages and  religions  have  the  advantage.  The  likeli- 
hood is  that  if  Christianity  should  remain  stubbornly 
unprogressive  the  larger  proportion  of  the  popula- 
tion would  cease  to  have  any  religion. 

For  many  reasons  it  is  earnestly  to  be  hoped  that 
the  Christian  Church  will  realize  its  opportunity  and 
so  alter  its  teaching  as  to  become  the  church  of  the 
future.  It  has  —  to  mention  one  —  the  inestimable 
advantage  of  an  already  widespread  and  powerful  or- 
ganization, large  endowments,  schools  of  the  ministry, 
thousands  of  church  buildings  throughout  the  coun- 
try. It  would  be  an  economic  waste  of  considerable 
magnitude  to  leave  the  old  church  buildings  to  be- 
come gradually  emptier  and  emptier  and  duplicate 
the  expenditures  that  have  produced  such  valuable 
property. 

But  more  than  that,  the  Christian  Church  has  a 
stirring  history  behind  it,  a  wealth  of  associations,  a 
noble  roll-call  of  heroes  and  martyrs,  all  that  appeals 
to  the  imagination  and  to  the  heart.     It  has  forms 


172  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

and  ceremonies,  grown  impressive  through  long  use, 
that  can  be  adapted  for  the  future.  It  has,  in  spite 
of  considerable  lack  of  touch  with  modern  thought,  a 
deep  hold  on  the  affections  of  the  people;  it  inspires 
an  instinctive  reverence  and  awe.  It  has  already  at 
hand  formed  habits  of  churchgoing,  meetings  for 
prayer  and  Christian  endeavor,  everything  that  culti- 
vates the  religious  life.  All  that  it  needs  is  to  drop, 
like  an  outgrown  shell,  its  obsolete  dogmas  and  its 
irritating  dogmatism. 

We  reckon  our  calendar  from  the  birth  of  Christ; 
Christmas  is  our  chief  holiday.  The  Christian  pul- 
pit is  the  place,  among  Aryan  peoples,  from  which  to 
teach  ideals  and  spiritualize  life.  The  Christian 
Church  will  persist,  whether  it  oppose  scientific  teach- 
ing or  no;  it  has  too  much  momentum  behind  it,  it 
is  too  splendid,  too  deep-rooted  in  our  civilization, 
to  die.  The  only  safeguard  against  its  pernicious 
and  choking  influence  upon  the  spread  of  sound  ideas 
of  life  lies  in  its  liberalization.  A  new  church  would 
give  spiritual  help  to  a  small  class  of  the  enlightened, 
but  would  leave  the  old  church  still  to  oppress  the 
minds  of  the  many;  we  should  have  the  same  sorry 
spectacle  of  a  great  and  venerable  institution  offering 
food  for  the  spirit,  but  opposing  the  spread  of  knowl- 
edge. 

If,  then,  the  Christian  Church  has  the  best  vantage- 
point  from  which  to  work,  the  immediate  need  is  to 
make  prevalent  that  interpretation  of  Christianity 
which  shall  enable  it  to  draw  all  earnest  men  to  its 
fold  and  unite  them  in  a  task  that  requires  our  utmost 
and  united  efforts.  Let  us  who  have  hesitated  as  to 
our  duty  boldly  proclaim  ourselves  Christians:  not 
skeptics,  for  we  do  not  doubt  the  importance  of  Chris- 
tian ideals;  not  infidels,  if  we  are  not  unfaithful  to 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  173 

those  ideals;  not  opponents  of  Christianity,  for  he 
alone  really  opposes  Christianity  who  teaches  world- 
liness,  license,  self-indulgence.  We  who  read  with 
discriminating  eyes  the  ancient  pages  of  Scripture 
can  find  inspiration  there  as  well  as  those  whose  re- 
ligion depends  on  their  misunderstanding  them.  We 
who  see  with  the  clearer  vision  of  modern  historical 
research  the  noble  figure  of  Jesus  can  acknowledge 
him  as  our  Master  no  less  reverently  than  those  who 
read  their  mediaeval  dogmas  into  his  teaching  and 
personality.  We  who  love  the  Christian  Church, 
whose  hearts  are  naturally  loyal  to  her  symbols, 
carrying  on  the  spiritual  warfare  that  she  has  so  long 
waged,  should  keep  our  home  within  her  sanctuary 
and  call  ourselves  by  the  great  name  —  Christian. 

Man  needs  not  only  religion  —  he  needs  a  religion. 
Our  religion  will  be  none  the  less  a  rational  and  uni- 
versally human  religion  from  having  a  local  habita- 
tion and  a  name.  It  may  well  be  that  a  man  cannot 
find  in  the  churches  near  him  any  inspiration,  any 
new  breadth  of  vision  or  insight  into  his  problems; 
that  is  his  misfortune.  But  it  may  also  be  his  op- 
portunity. Let  him  heartily  enter  some  church,  give 
of  his  own  ardor  and  experience,  and  help  make  it 
the  source  of  power  it  should  be.  The  good  that  he 
can  do  may  seem  infinitesimal,  and  not  worth  the 
waste  of  time  and  the  irksome  attendance  at  a  service 
with  which  he  is  only  half  in  sympathy.  It  is  like 
the  duty  to  vote,  which  by  so  many  busy  men  is 
neglected  because  one  ballot  more  or  less  among  the 
thousands  counts  so  little.  But  elections  are  lost 
that  way;  and  churches  are  lost,  are  given  over  to  the 
narrow-minded  and  illiberal,  dwindle  in  number,  lose 
their  effectiveness.  And  so  those  of  the  community 
who  are  not  fortunate  in  their  home  influences  grow 


174  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

up  with  practically  no  training  in  the  duties  of  life, 
no  thought  and  no  interest  in  spiritual  things. 

No  matter,  then,  if  churchgoing  appear  a  burden 
and  a  hardship,  if  it  give  us  little  meat  for  our  souls ; 
no  matter  if  we  feel  at  times  in  a  false  position  and 
seem  to  stand  for  beliefs  we  cannot  hold :  these  are 
small  sacrifices  for  so  great  an  end.  Let  us  check  our 
impatience  at  the  ignorance,  the  narrowness,  the 
dogmatism  that  we  find  there;  let  us  give  of  our 
knowledge  and  enthusiasm,  and  join  humbly  with  all 
those,  whatever  their  belief,  who  strive  for  the  spirit 
of  Christ  and  seek  to  live  the  Christian  life.  For 
these  things  are  incomparably  more  important  than 
those  other  things;  all  who  believe  in  that  spirit  and 
that  life  are  our  brothers,  and  what  we  have  in  com- 
mon is  far  greater  than  our  differences.  If  we  go, 
not  in  the  critical  spirit,  or  merely  seeking  to  get 
something  for  ourselves,  but  because  we  sympathize 
with  those  who  are  striving  to  live  purely,  and  wish 
for  fellowship  with  them,  because  we  wish  to  give  our 
mite  of  strength  and  influence  to  what  is,  after  all, 
the  greatest  force  in  the  world  for  righteousness,  and 
to  help  in  the  making  of  it  more  and  more  such  a 
force  —  if  we  go  in  this  spirit,  we  shall  hardly  fail 
to  be  the  better  for  it  ourselves. 

We  may  recall  the  words  of  Mill :  "  If  all  were  to 
desert  the  Church  who  put  a  large  and  liberal  con- 
struction on  its  terms  of  communion,  or  who  would 
wish  to  see  those  terms  widened,  the  national  pro- 
vision for  religious  teaching  and  worship  would  be 
left  utterly  to  those  who  take  the  narrowest,  the  most 
literal,  and  purely  textual  view  of  the  formularies. 
Therefore,  if  it  were  not  an  impertinence  in  me  to 
tender  advice  in  such  a  matter,  I  should  say,  let  all 
who  conscientiously  can  remain  in  the  Church.     A 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  175 

church  is  far  more  easily  improved  from  within  than 
from  without." 

A  lady  once  told  Huxley  that,  as  she  did  not  be- 
lieve the  Athanasian  Creed,  she  had  got  up  and  left 
church  when  the  minister  began  to  read  it.  "  Now, 
Mr.  Huxley,  don't  you  think  I  was  quite  right  to  mark 
my  disapproval?''  "My  dear  lady,"  said  Huxley, 
"  I  should  as  soon  think  of  rising  and  leaving  your 
table  because  I  disapproved  of  one  of  the  entrees." 

If  the  Church  is  not  to  be  more  and  more  a  force  for 
reaction  and  stupidity,  if  it  is  not  to  continue  the 
decay  which  in  many  quarters  seems  to  be  begun,  if  it 
is  to  develop  along  the  liberal  lines  that  are  in  many 
other  quarters  being  manifested,  if  it  is  going  to  be 
anything  like  the  power  for  good  it  might  be  in  the 
world,  we  must  not  desert  it  in  this  time  of  stress. 
We  owe  it  to  the  future  — if  there  seems  to  be  no 
present  good  to  be  attained  —  to  stay  by  it,  and  not  to 
leave  it  to  the  ultra-conservative  and  bigoted.  The 
church  is  as  necessary  an  institution  as  the  school 
or  the  public  library.  If  it  is  not  what  it  ought  to  be, 
it  is  for  us  to  keep  working  until  we  make  it  what  it 
ought  to  be. 

One  of  many  contemporary  expressions  of  this 
spirit  may  be  found  in  an  article  contributed  anon- 
ymously to  the  Outlook  sl  few  years  ago  by  a  worker 
in  St.  George's  Church,  New  York  City.  "  I  am,"  the 
writer  says,  "  or  at  least  I  try  to  be,  a  man.  To  that 
end  I  endeavor  to  be  courageous,  truthful,  and  con- 
siderate of  others.  At  St.  George's  and  in  its  work  I 
find  an  atmosphere  which  stimulates  me  in  this  effort 
and  helps  me  to  refurbish  ideals  which  are  tarnished 
by  the  acid  gases  that  are  constantly  generated  by  the 
struggle  for  existence.  ...  The  theories  of  the 
Church  with  regard  to  the  supernatural  or  the  trans- 


176  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

cendental  interest  me  not  at  alL  I  regard  the  Chris- 
tian Church  in  its  entirety,  including  both  Catholics 
and  Protestants,  as  the  most  benelScent  organization 
society  has  yet  devised  for  the  promotion  of  altruism 
and  morality.  I  feel  that  St.  George's  is  the  most 
virile  and  congenial  arm  of  that  organization  with 
which  I  have  come  in  contact.  I  am  conscious  that 
it  helps  me  as  I  have  stated,  and  that  it  inspires  me 
with  a  desire  to  help  others. 

"  I  am  therefore  glad  to  do  what  I  can  in  my  humble 
way  to  forv\^ard  the  work  in  which  St.  George's  is  en- 
gaged, and  feel  it  a  privilege  to  attend  its  services, 
although  I  am  not  confirmed,  do  not  go  to  Commun- 
ion, and  would  be  guilty  of  intellectual  hypocrisy  if 
I  repeated  the  Creed  or  joined  in  the  petitions  and 
declarations  of  the  Prayer  Book. 

"  I  am  writing  this  because  my  observation  leads 
me  to  believe  that  many  other  laymen  feel  as  I  do  in 
regard  to  questions  of  theology.  .  .  .  Such  men  no 
longer  identify  themselves  with  the  Church,  and  are 
leaving  it  in  large  numbers,  because  they  feel  that 
they  will  be  hypocritical  and  so  regarded  if  they  join 
in  the  work  of  an  organization  that  professes  to  be- 
lieve some  theories  which  they  cannot  accept. 

"  These  same  men  are  nevertheless  anxious  to  do 
good,  to  help  their  fellowmen,  and  to  live  clean,  hon- 
est, and  healthful  lives. 

"  To  such  men  I  would  say  that  ...  a  literal  ac- 
ceptance of  its  creeds  and  theology  has  become  impos- 
sible for  most  people.  They  need  not,  however,  be 
thereby  deterred  from  joining  in  its  humanitarian 
work  if  they  think  that  it  is  worth  while.  No  sus- 
picion of  hypocrisy  will  rest  upon  them  for  so  doing." 

It  is  not,  however,  merely  for  the  sake  of  those 
whom  we  can  help  through  the  Church,  or  for  the  sake 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  177 

of  the  Church  itself,  but  for  our  own  sakes.  ReHgion 
tends  to  languish  in  those  to  whom  the  traditional 
dogmatic  expression  of  it  has  become  impossible. 
Such  persons  are  much  too  ready  to  acquiesce  in  isola- 
tion as  a  necessary  result  of  their  opinions.  "  It  is 
surely  a  weakness,  when  we  are  not  pressed  for  our 
opinions,  to  make  so  much  of  them  to  other  people,  or 
to  ourselves,  as  to  be  excluded  or  to  exclude  ourselves 
from  joining  in  a  common  activity,  the  spirit  of  which 
we  inwardly  reverence  and  would  gladly  make  our 
own,  while  in  separation  we  are  almost  certain  to  lose 
it.''  ^ 

It  is  a  critical  time  for  religion.  Fact  and  illusion 
have  been  so  long  intertwined,  religion  has  come  to  be 
so  closely  associated  with  particular  world-views,  that 
the  decay  of  the  latter  threatens  to  involve  the  decay 
of  the  former  also.  Now,  if  ever,  must  we  cling  firmly 
to  the  great  and  ultimate  realities  of  life.  Let  each 
man  who  has  moved  away  from  the  traditional  doc- 
trines be  zealous  that  he  fail  not  in  his  life;  rather 
let  his  righteousness  exceed  that  of  these  others;  let 
him  be  sterner  with  himself,  more  instant  and  inflexi- 
ble in  denying  his  lower  nature,  in  refusing  to  give 
way  to  self-indulgence  or  greed ;  that  all  may  see  that 
clearness  of  sight  and  fervor  of  heart  are  not  incom- 
patible. Let  it  be  seen  that  the  danger  to  religion 
lies  not  in  any  change  of  beliefs,  but  in  that  sluggish 
indifference  which  may  consort  with  any  belief,  that 
worldliness  and  pleasure-seeking  to  which  we  are 
more  and  more  tempted  by  the  very  advance  and  bet- 
terment of  our  material  civilization. 

Let  the  pessimism  and  vulgarity  that  flaunt  them- 
selves in  our  literature  be  branded  for  what  they  are, 
not  the  unfortunate  result  of  irreligion,  but  irreligion 

1 T.  H,  Green,  Faith. 


178  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

itself.  Let  the  finger  of  condemnation  be  pointed  at 
the  rake,  the  trifler,  the  unscrupulous  merchant,  the 
dirty  politician.  Let  every  man  in  his  private  and 
in  his  public  life  keep  clean  and  honest  and  upright ; 
let  him  not  relax  his  moral  vigor  or  be  afraid  of  hard 
work,  of  poverty,  or  of  pain;  let  him  not  become  ef- 
feminate, luxury-loving,  immersed  in  selfish  ease. 
The  Church  stands  there  to  tell  us  that  there  is  some- 
thing higher  and  better  than  ourselves  to  live  for, 
something  unspeakably  great  and  worthy  of  our  ut- 
most endeavors  and  our  entire  allegiance:  that  we 
can  rise  above  our  own  petty  failures  and  disappoint- 
ments in  the  thought  of  serving,  at  however  humble  a 
post,  in  the  greatest  of  all  causes  —  of  which  all 
worthy  causes,  all  good  work,  and  every  loving  deed 
form  a  living  part  —  the  service  of  humanity,  which 
is  the  service  of  God.  And  in  that  service,  according 
to  the  measure  of  our  devotion,  we  shall  find  peace. 

The  future  of  the  Church  should  be  to  us  all  a  mat- 
ter of  grave  anxiety.  Will  the  reactionary  forces  win 
the  day  and  the  Church  stand  opposed  to  the  intel- 
lectual enlightenment  which  science  is  forcing  upon 
the  world?  If  so,  her  doom  is  sounded.  She  will 
undoubtedly  persist,  with  recurrent  revivals  of  ardor, 
into  the  indefinite  future.  But  she  will  cease  gradu- 
ally to  be  a  vital  force  in  the  world ;  and  meanwhile, 
for  a  long  time,  th^  unhappy  conflict  of  ideals,  be- 
tween intellectual  honesty  and  spiritual  fervor,  will 
continue  to  tear  the  hearts  of  earnest  men  and  divide 
their  allegiance.  Worst  of  all,  until  men  succeed  in 
building  upon  a  rational  foundation  a  great  new  re- 
ligion, and  until  it  attains  the  prestige  of  numbers 
and  of  age,  there  will  be  increasing  danger  of  irre- 
ligion,  of  every  form  of  license  and  excess.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  Church  will  but  admit  freely  the  new 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  179 

knowledge  of  our  times,  realize  her  true  function  as 
guardian  not  of  the  cosmological  ideas,  but  of  the 
moral  ideals  of  mankind,  and  maintain  more  and  more 
vigorously  her  inspiring  and  wisely  repressive  influ- 
ence over  conduct,  we  may  look  for  the  time  when  all 
men  of  good-will  shall  reenter  her  fold  and  Christen- 
dom shall  again  be  a  name  synonymous  with  "  the 
Western  World." 

This  is  surely  one  of  the  most  momentous  issues  of 
our  times.  It  is  momentous  in  that  the  outcome  will 
affect  the  intellectual  status  of  the  generations  yet 
unborn,  will  decide  whether  their  minds  shall  be  filled 
with  theological  fictions  or  with  scientific  verities.  It 
is  far  more  momentous  in  that  it  will  affect  the  re- 
ligious life  of  those  generations.  If  "  orthodoxy," 
even  in  some  modified  and  expurgated  form,  wins  the 
day  in  the  churches,  more  and  more  men  will  be  driven 
from  them,  and  the  likelihood  is  that  a  large  propor- 
tion of  mankind  for  an  indefinite  time  to  come  will  be 
without  that  moral  impetus  which  a  great  organized 
church  can  impart. 

The  Church  of  the  future  must  present  the  great 
duties  of  life  free  from  dogmatism  and  doubtful  as- 
sertion, must  give  us  those  truths  which  are  grounded 
in  the  very  nature  and  conditions  of  human  life  un- 
mixed with  what  is  unproved  or  irrational.  Will  the 
Christian  Church  do  this  for  us,  will  it  adapt  itself  to 
man's  clearing  intellectual  horizon  and  maintain  its 
spiritual  leadership,  or  must  we  henceforth  seek  else- 
where our  guidance  and  inspiration?  Are  its  pro- 
gressive and  liberal  tendencies  going  to  win  the 
day,  or  will  the  forces  of  conservatism  and  reac- 
tion prove  the  stronger?  That  is  the  great  re- 
ligious question  of  the  near  future.  The  Christian 
Church  is  engaged  in  a  struggle  to  the  death  between 


180  SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH? 

the  forces  that  make  for  such  a  liberalization  of  re- 
ligion and  those  that  make  for  reaction.  On  the  out- 
come of  this  struggle  depend  our  hopes  —  whether  we, 
and  our  descendants,  may  come  to  her  for  our  guid- 
ance, or  whether  we  must  look  elsewhere. 

The  present  situation  is  far  from  satisfactory. 
But  there  are  many  hopeful  signs.  If  the  Church 
shall  finally  come  to  walk  hand  in  hand  with  science, 
it  may  bring  wisdom  into  religion  and  religion  into 
everyday  work  in  a  degree  unknown  hitherto.  From 
this  alliance  should  spring  types  of  spiritual  life 
larger  and  finer  than  those  which  the  old  faith,  so 
sweet,  but  so  narrow,  could  engender.  A  church  that 
based  its  teaching  wholly  upon  indubitable  facts  and 
a  rational  concej)tion  of  the  universe  could  become  in 
fullest  degree  the  inspiration  and  guide  of  humanity. 
The  Christian  Church  could  be  the  rallying-place  in 
the  fight  against  all  forms  of  evil,  the  joy  and  con- 
solation of  all  those  who  long  to  forget  their  own 
petty  lives  in  something  finer  and  larger.  Here  could 
the  lonely  of  heart  find  welcome  and  fellowship,  the 
ignorant  and  groping  find  counsel  and  direction  from 
wisdom  and  experience.  As  in  the  early  Christian 
era,  so  again  the  Church's  triumphs  would  be  our 
triumph  and  her  life  our  life ;  to  her  we  would  gladly 
give  our  strength  and  in  her  service  realize  the  mean- 
ing of  our  common  brotherhood. 

Some  of  the  Christian  churches  are  rapidly  ap- 
proaching this  ideal.  But  there  are  strong  forces  at 
work  for  a  narrower  interpretation  of  religion.  It  is 
a  crucial  epoch  in  the  history  of  Christianity.  If  the 
Church  fails  to  rise  to  its  opportunity  and  make  the 
necessary  readjustment,  there  is  yet  long  strife  and 
bitterness  before  us,  and  the  union  of  earnest  men 
against  the  powers  of  darkness  will  be  long  delayed. 


SHALL  WE  STAND  BY  THE  CHURCH?  181 

A  Christianity  siicli  as  we  have  described  has  never 
yet  been  realized  on  earth  —  who  knows  how  it  might 
transform  the  world!  Has  the  Christian  Church 
vitality  and  power  of  growth  enough  to  meet  its  op- 
portunity, or  will  its  potentialities  remain  unde- 
veloped and  its  prestige  count  more  and  more  on  the 
side  of  reaction  and  division?  The  future  of  religion 
among  us  hangs  in  the  balance,  and  with  it,  in  no  in- 
considerable degree,  the  future  of  humanity. 


PRINTED   IN   THH   UNTTBD   STATES    OF  AMEEIOA 


Date  Due 

*  5-  ' 

^               i 

— 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

- 



— 

— 

■ 

1 

[ 

(f 

^L  BOOK  SHOP  Inc. 

GOOD  BOOKS 

BOUGHT  and  SOLO 

1  WEST  12STH  ST. 

NEW  YORK  CITY 

HARLEM   7-B387 


